Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

A Study on Adoption of Knowledge Management Tools and its Impact on Organizational Performance - A Balance Scorecard Approach


Affiliations
1 Alliance University, Chikkahagade Cross, Chandrapura, Anekal Main Road, Anekal, Bangalore – 562106, Karnataka, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


Knowledge Management (KM) systems are useful in promoting innovation and providing firms with a competitive advantage by enabling the creation of unique and customized goods that increase revenue. KM is instrumental in achieving organizational goals. Various companies now considering implementing KM software. This paper discusses and compares select companies like Ford, Amazon, World Bank, GE and Pratt and Whitney. The researcher used the Balanced Score Card Framework to compare organizational performance. The research is based on secondary data. It seeks to ascertain the level to which KM tools are being implemented in select organisations. Second, the study aims to study the impact of the degree of application of these technologies on the overall performance of the company in question. It has been identified that the total application of knowledge management technologies in case organizations has helped them achieve organizational success. Even though organizations implemented the internet to a high degree and intranets, decision support systems and e-learning to a reasonable level, some case companies are lagging in the implementation of other tools.

Keywords

KM Software, Knowledge Management, Organizational Performance.
User
About The Authors

Madhavi Chattarki
Alliance University, Chikkahagade Cross, Chandrapura, Anekal Main Road, Anekal, Bangalore – 562106, Karnataka
India

Sukanya Kundu
Alliance University, Chikkahagade Cross, Chandrapura, Anekal Main Road, Anekal, Bangalore – 562106, Karnataka
India


Notifications

  • Abualoush, S., Masa’deh, R., Bataineh, K., and Alrowwad, A. (2018). The role of knowledge management process and intellectual capital as intermediary variables between knowledge management infrastructure and organization performance. Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, Knowledge, and Management, 13, 279–309. https://doi.org/10.28945/4088
  • Alani, F. S., Khan, M. F. R., Manuel, D. F. (2018). University performance evaluation and strategic mapping using Balanced Scorecard (BSC) case study – Sohar University. International Journal of Educational Management, 32(4), 689–700. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-05-2017-0107
  • Alboliteeh, M., Alrashidi, M. S., Alrashedi, N., Gonzales, A., Mostoles, R., Pasay-an, E., and Dator, W. L. (2023). Knowledge management and sustainability performance of hospital organisations: The healthcare managers’ perspective. Sustainability, 15(1), 203. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010203
  • Anand, A. & Walsh, I. (2016). Should knowledge be shared generously? Tracing insights from past to present and describing a model. Journal of Knowledge Management, 20(4), 713–730. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-10-2015-0401
  • Asrar-ul-Haq, M., and Anwar, S. (2016). A systematic review of knowledge management and knowledge sharing: trends, issues, and challenges. Cogent Business and Management, 3(1), Article 1127744. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.20 15.1127744
  • Boyes, B. (2016). Trends, issues and challenges in knowledge management and sharing: Research review. RealKM . Byukusenge, E., Munene, J., and Orobia, L. (2016). Knowledge management and business performance: mediating effect of innovation. Journal of Business and Management Sciences, 4(4), 82–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2017.1368434
  • Chadha, A. (2020). 3 ways a knowledge management software can improve the sales process. Knowledge Management.
  • Chaithanapat, P., Punnakitikashem, P., Oo, N. C. K. K., and Rakthin, S. (2022). Relationships among knowledgeoriented leadership, customer knowledge management, innovation quality and firm performance in SMEs. Journal of Innovation and Knowledge, 7(1), Article 100162. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2022.100162
  • Chowdhury, N. (2018). Designing Human-centered Knowledge Management. DataDrivenInvestor.
  • Cillo, V., Gregori, G. L., Daniele, L. M., Caputo, F., and Bitbol-Saba, N. (2022). Rethinking companies’ culture through knowledge management lens during Industry 5.0 transition. Journal of Knowledge Management, 26(10), 2485–2498. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-09-2021-0718
  • Cob, C., Abdullah, R., Risidi, H., and Mohd, N. M. (2015). Preliminary study on semantic knowledge management model for collaborative learning. ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 10(2), 442–450.
  • Dan, P., and Sunesson, K. (2012). Knowledge transfer, knowledge sharing and knowledge barriers – three blurry terms in km. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 10(1), 82–92.
  • de Bem Machado, A., Secinaro, S., Calandra, D., and Lanzalonga, F. (2022). Knowledge management and digital transformation for Industry 4.0: A structured literature review. Knowledge Management Research and Practice, 20(2), 320–338. https://doi.org/10.1080/14778 238.2021.2015261
  • Edwards, J. S. (2022). Where knowledge management and information management meet: Research directions. International Journal of Information Management, 63, Article 102458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102458
  • Emerson, L. C., and Berge, Z. L. (2018). Microlearning: Knowledge management applications and competencybased training in the workplace. Knowledge Management & E-Learning An International Journal, 10(2), 125–132.
  • Emadezade, M., Mashayekhi, B., and Abdar, E. (2012). Knowledge management capabilities and organizational performance. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3, 781–790.
  • Farooq, R. (2023). Knowledge management and performance: A bibliometric analysis based on Scopus and WOS data (1988–2021). Journal of Knowledge Management, 27(7), 1948–1991. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-06-2022-0443
  • Gao, T., Chai, Y. and Liu, Y. (2018). A review of knowledge management about theoretical conception and designing approaches. International Journal of Crowd Science, 2(1), 42–51. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCS-08-2017-0023.
  • Gartner (2023) Knowledge Management Software Reviews and Ratings. Available at: https://www.gartner.com/reviews/ market/knowledge-management-software
  • Gupta, B., Iyer, L., and Aronson, J. (2000). Knowledge management: Practices and challenges. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 100(1-2), 17–21. https:// doi.org/10.1108/02635570010273018
  • Hegazy, F. & Ghorab, K. (2014). The influence of knowledge management on organizational business processes’ and employees’ benefits. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 5(1), 148-172. https://doi. org/10.5171/2015.928262
  • Hooker, T. (2019). How Knowledge Management Reduces Your Service Costs. Document 360.
  • Huettich, J. (2020). What are the key challenges of knowledge management? MindManager.
  • Jones, A., and Shideh, R. (2021). The significance of knowledge management in the knowledge economy of the 21st century. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 15(2), 366–377.
  • Makhsousi, A., Sadaghiani, J., and Amiri, M. (2013). A review on recent advances on knowledge management implementations. Management Science Letters, 3(3), 861– 866. ttps://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2013.01.037
  • Omotayo, F. O. (2015). Knowledge management as an important tool in organisational management: A review of literature. Library Philosophy and Practice, 1238. Available at: http:// digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/1238
  • Sahoo, S., Kumar, A., and Upadhyay, A. (2023). How do green knowledge management and green technology innovation impact corporate environmental performance? Understanding the role of green knowledge acquisition. Business Strategy and the Environment, 32(1), 551–569. https://doi.org/10.1002/ bse.3160
  • Scuotto, V., Alfiero, S., Cuomo, M. T., and Monge, F. (2023). Knowledge management and technological innovation in family SMEs context. Journal of Knowledge Management. In press. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-04-2023-0281
  • Singh, R. K., and Arora, S. S. (2018). The adoption of balanced scorecard: An exploration of its antecedents and consequences. Benchmarking, 2(3), 874–892. https://doi. org/10.1108/BIJ-06-2017-0130
  • Tajpour, M., Hosseini, E., Mohammadi, M., and Bahman- Zangi, B. (2022). The effect of knowledge management on the sustainability of technology-driven businesses in emerging markets: The mediating role of social media. Sustainability, 14(14), Article 8602. https://doi. org/10.3390/su14148602
  • Tibben, W. (2006). Unlocking the secrets of Amazon: Understanding tacit knowledge and its implications for e-business. The International Journal of Knowledge, Culture, and Change Management: Annual Review, 5(8), 167–174. https://doi.org/10.18848/1447-9524/CGP/v05i08/50104
  • Tiwari, S. P. (2022). Knowledge management strategies and emerging technologies – An overview of the underpinning concepts International Journal of Innovative Technologies in Economy, 1(37). https://doi.org/10.31435/rsglobal_ ijite/30032022/7791
  • Wang, S., Abbas, J., Sial, M. S., Álvarez-Otero, S., and Cioca, L. I. (2022). Achieving green innovation and sustainable development goals through green knowledge management: Moderating role of organizational green culture. Journal of Innovation and Knowledge, 7(4), Article 100272. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2022.100272
  • World Bank (2021). Managing knowledge, learning, and data for operations. Available at: https://thedocs.worldbank. org/en/doc/248681543420897102-0050022018/original/ DECKMbrochure.pdf

Abstract Views: 80

PDF Views: 3




  • A Study on Adoption of Knowledge Management Tools and its Impact on Organizational Performance - A Balance Scorecard Approach

Abstract Views: 80  |  PDF Views: 3

Authors

Madhavi Chattarki
Alliance University, Chikkahagade Cross, Chandrapura, Anekal Main Road, Anekal, Bangalore – 562106, Karnataka, India
Sukanya Kundu
Alliance University, Chikkahagade Cross, Chandrapura, Anekal Main Road, Anekal, Bangalore – 562106, Karnataka, India

Abstract


Knowledge Management (KM) systems are useful in promoting innovation and providing firms with a competitive advantage by enabling the creation of unique and customized goods that increase revenue. KM is instrumental in achieving organizational goals. Various companies now considering implementing KM software. This paper discusses and compares select companies like Ford, Amazon, World Bank, GE and Pratt and Whitney. The researcher used the Balanced Score Card Framework to compare organizational performance. The research is based on secondary data. It seeks to ascertain the level to which KM tools are being implemented in select organisations. Second, the study aims to study the impact of the degree of application of these technologies on the overall performance of the company in question. It has been identified that the total application of knowledge management technologies in case organizations has helped them achieve organizational success. Even though organizations implemented the internet to a high degree and intranets, decision support systems and e-learning to a reasonable level, some case companies are lagging in the implementation of other tools.

Keywords


KM Software, Knowledge Management, Organizational Performance.

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.17821/srels%2F2023%2Fv60i6%2F170958