Search results

The manner in which a business strategy was formulated ten or even as little as five years ago, no longer applies. This phenomenon can to a great extent be attributed to a shift in the strategic importance of information and knowledge. The aim of this paper is to supply strategic thinkers with a holistic “bird’s eye view” of the interdependency between strategic management and strategic knowledge management. By analyzing the different perspectives with regard to strategy formulation from a business point of view, as well as a knowledge management perspective, a generic model incorporating knowledge management strategy formulation within business strategy formulation has been developed.

Beyond critique of current maturity models, the research literature has neglected to supply empirical evidence of the value knowledge management (KM) holds for organizations. The majority of studies, in common with other emergent business philosophies, are focused on large organizations of developed economies, where readily available implementation resources are an underlying assumption. This paper aims to address this issue and to assess the correlation between the successful institutionalization of KM and organizational performance (OP) in a developing economy.

From a large urban South African university engaged in numerous collaboration programs with industry, the authors gained insight into KM maturity and organizational performance (OP) of three industry groups, over a five‐year period. The authors apply an inventory developed by Kruger and Snyman to a set of nine organisations distributed over three economic sectors in South Africa.

By evaluating the relationship between KM maturity and OP from within three “time dependent” perspectives, insight was gained to answer the aim of the research undertaken, “Is there a correlation between KM maturity and OP in South Africa?” Diagrammatic presentation of OP scores and KM maturity growth revealed that in five out of the nine organizations there is a clearly identifiable relationship between KM maturity and OP in South Africa in both entities over the period under investigation. In certain instances, the correlations were not easily noticeable and/or were non‐existent. From a mathematical perspective, in comparing the correlation between growth in KM maturity and year‐on‐year growth in OP, it was revealed that six of the eight companies that recorded positive growth in KM maturity also recorded positive (year‐on‐year) growth in OP. In a similar manner, it was established that the company recording negative growth in KM maturity also recorded negative (year‐on‐year) growth in OP.

Because the South African scenario can be considered a benchmark for developing economies characterized by continued change, diversity and even elements of silent intolerance and conflict, this study may be viewed as a “pilot study” to provide a baseline and insight into future research of KM for enabling OP.

This paper is of relevance to strategic managers and KM practitioners interested in gaining insight into the correlation between KM maturity and organisational performance.

The institutionalization of knowledge management (KM) principles, policies and strategies could be summarized as being diverse, problematic and located across the spectrum of views. Studies suggest that very little is reported on how these principles are institutionalized in organizations. This paper seeks to examine the role these principles play in the establishment of KM and report on an empirical study conducted in 86 South African‐based organizations.

From a large urban South African University engaged in numerous collaboration programs with industry, the authors gained insight into KM maturity in industry groupings over a five‐year period. The authors applied an inventory developed by Kruger and Snyman to a set of 86 organizations distributed over nine economic sectors in South Africa. In total 434 employees were interviewed over three managerial levels (operational, middle, and senior). This was achieved by having 178 senior practitioners to each interview three subjects (one in each group level).

Findings indicate that there is a definite trend towards the establishment of KM principles and the successful implementation of KM across South African industries. Industries achieving higher than average scores in the establishment of KM principles also achieved higher than average scores in the implementation of KM. Findings strongly support the argument that elements such as the formulation of strategy, measurement, policy, content, process, technology and culture enable or influence KM ability to manage knowledge.

The paper is of relevance to KM practitioners interested in gaining insight into KM maturity that occurred in the extremely diversified environment of South Africa.

Academic authors tend to define terms that meet their own needs. Knowledge Management (KM) is a term that comes to mind and is examined in this study. Lexicographical research identified KM terms used by authors from 1996 to 2006 in academic outlets to define KM. Data were collected based on strict criteria which included that definitions should be unique instances. From 2006 onwards, these authors could not identify new unique instances of definitions with repetitive usage of such definition instances. Analysis revealed that KM is directly defined by People (Person and Organisation), Processes (Codify, Share, Leverage, and Process) and Contextualised Content (Information). The paper aims to discuss these issues.

The aim of this paper is to add to the body of knowledge in the KM discipline and supply KM practitioners and scholars with insight into what is commonly regarded to be KM so as to reignite the debate on what one could consider as KM. The lexicon used by KM scholars was evaluated though the application of lexicographical research methods as extended though Knowledge Discovery and Text Analysis methods.

By simplifying term relationships through the application of lexicographical research methods, as extended though Knowledge Discovery and Text Analysis methods, it was found that KM is directly defined by People (Person and Organisation), Processes (Codify, Share, Leverage, Process) and Contextualised Content (Information). One would therefore be able to indicate that KM, from an academic point of view, refers to people processing contextualised content.

In total, 42 definitions were identified spanning a period of 11 years. This represented the first use of KM through the estimated apex of terms used. From 2006 onwards definitions were used in repetition, and all definitions that were considered to repeat were therefore subsequently excluded as not being unique instances. All definitions listed are by no means complete and exhaustive. The definitions are viewed outside the scope and context in which they were originally formulated and then used to review the key concepts in the definitions themselves.

When the authors refer to the aforementioned discussion of KM content as well as the presentation of the method followed in this paper, the authors may have a few implications for future research in KM. First the research validates ideas presented by the OECD in 2005 pertaining to KM. It also validates that through the evolution of KM, the authors ended with a description of KM that may be seen as a standardised description. If the authors as academics and practitioners, for example, refer to KM as the same construct and/or idea, it has the potential to speculatively, distinguish between what KM may or may not be.

By simplifying the term used to define KM, by focusing on the most common definitions, the paper assist in refocusing KM by reconsidering the dimensions that is the most common in how it has been defined over time. This would hopefully assist in reigniting discussions about KM and how it may be used to the benefit of an organisation.

Identity management (IdM) not only improves the process of creating and maintaining digital identities across business systems; it can, if implemented successfully, contribute to the strengthening and positioning of the business for success. In order to have a successful IdM implementation, an organisation must step back to determine a course of action that solves enterprise‐wide issues. Short‐sighted actions can lead to confusion, unnecessary expenses and the delay of beneficial results. The purpose of this paper is to deliver guidelines for the application of strategic management principles regarding IdM implementation, and propose a holistic model incorporating business strategy formulation with IdM strategy formulation.

A total of ten senior managers involved in IdM implementation projects were interviewed. Face‐to face interviews were conducted, with 30 minutes allocated per participant, and an assistant present to administer the proceedings. Primary data was collected using a semi‐structured questionnaire. Part A of the questionnaire collected the respondent's details and provided definitions of IdM to clarify the concept. Part B consisted of descriptive questions which dealt with the following three categories: IdM as part of the business strategy, IdM challenges in the company, IdM implementation approach used by the company and strategic framework used.

Findings indicate that IdM is seen as part of strategy and as such IdM implementations consist of a strategic thinking process accompanied by an incremental tactical implementation. Challenges facing IdM centred not on technological issues, but on implementing IdM as a competitive tool. Unfortunately, lack of commitment and external environment analysis; relegate IdM planning to remain on a tactical, rather than a strategic level.

A strategic planning process is presented in this article to model the interdependence between IdM implementation planning and strategic management (business strategy formulation). This model enables the organisation to develop and communicate its vision for IdM, to link IdM and business plans, and to gain the support of the whole enterprise in this endeavour. By leveraging the proposed model, organisations can gain a bird's eye view of IdM as an integral part of the business strategy, and ensure an IdM implementation that has enterprise‐wide support and benefits.