The Impact of Knowledge Sharing in the Growth of Corporate

The Impact of Knowledge Sharing in the Growth of Corporate Culture

(A Critical Analysis of Pharma Industry)

Jikku Susan Kurian1, K Rajini

2

Research Scholar, Department of Business Administration, Sri Vasavi College (Affiliated to

Bharathiar University), Erode Tamil Nadu, India.1

Associate Professor, Department of Business Administration, Sri Vasavi College (Affiliated to

Bharathiar University), Erode Tamil Nadu, India.2

Email (Corresponding author): [email protected] Abstract

Knowledge management is the systematic management of an organization's knowledge assets

for creating value and meeting tactical & strategic requirements. It consists of the initiatives,

processes, strategies, and systems that sustain and enhance the storage, assessment, sharing,

refinement, and creation of knowledge. Knowledge management is the deliberate and systematic

coordination of an organization’s people, technology, processes, and organizational structure in order

to add value through reuse and innovation. This is achieved through creating, sharing, and applying

knowledge as well as through the feeding of valuable lessons learned and best practices acquired into

corporate memory in order to foster continued organizational learning. Each enterprise should define

knowledge management in terms of its own business objectives. Knowledge management is all about

applying knowledge in new, previously overburdened or novel situations.

Keywords

Knowledge Management, Knowledge Sharing, Corporate Culture, Information

Features of Knowledge Management:

A concept widely discussed, knowledge management is gaining importance because of its

prominence in the knowledge-based economy. Few features of knowledge management are listed as

follows.

Knowledge is contextual and it can be re-used

Benefits of knowledge is obtained only if it is applied

The values of knowledge may change over time

Knowledge has to be renewed or maintained

It can be difficult to transfer, capture and distribute knowledge

It is developed through learning processes

Depends on memory, past experience, expertise, knowledge transfer mechanisms and available

opportunities.

Facilitates effectiveness and „sense-making‟

Knowledge enables higher learning

Knowledge creation and utilization is enhanced with technology

Need:

Globalization of Business − Organizations today are more universal i.e., they are operating in

multiple sites, multilingual, and multicultural in nature.

Leaner Organizations − Organizations are adapting to a lean strategy where they understand

customer value and focus on key processes to continuously increase it. The ultimate goal is to

provide perfect value to the customer through a perfect value creation process that has zero waste.

Corporate Amnesia − We are free as a workforce, which creates issues regarding knowledge

continuity for the organization and places with continuous learning demands from knowledge

worker. We no longer expect to spend our entire work life with the same organization.

Technological Advances − The world is more connected with the advent of websites, smart phones

and other latest gadgets. Advancements in technology has not only helped in better connectivity but

also changed expectations. Companies are expected to have online presence round the clock

providing required information as per the customer needs.

272

ISSN NO: 1301-2746

http://adalyajournal.com/

ADALYA JOURNAL

Volume 8, Issue 11, November 2019

Review of Literature:

Bharadwaj, S. S., Shah, S., & Raman, A. (2015) stated that there has been a dramatic

change over the last one decade and the new economy of knowledge based has been developed. This is been

felt as a need of an hour to meet the global competition to sustain in the economy. The primary focus of

many organizations is to develop new applications of information technology to support the digital capture,

storage, retrieval and distribution of organization‟s explicitly documented knowledge. Some Organizations

also use tacit knowledge, which can be shared by creating a culture in Organizations. The success or failure

of knowledge management depends upon identification and assessment of capability for successful

knowledge management implementation. There are several models developed by various experts for

effective implementation of knowledge management.

Omotayo, F. O., (2015) is of the opinion that knowledge is the critical ingredient for organizations

seeking sustainable strategic competitive advantage. So it is essential to follow the process of creating,

managing, sharing and utilizing knowledge effectively. This can be only possible with the help of three

components namely people, processes and technology.

Alsalim, M. S., & Mohamed, N. Y. (2013) claimed that right implementation of knowledge

management process is one of the basic requirement for effective Organization performance. Knowledge is

considered as valuable resource and asset in all Organizations but its application differs from country to

country and Organization to Organization. It integrates people, processes and technology to achieve

sustainable results by increasing performance through learning. There are certain things in knowledge

management like knowledge generation, knowledge storage, knowledge publishing and knowledge

application. Organizational performance is the basis of its survival and growth under competitive

circumstances.

Silwattananusarn, T., & Tuamsuk, K. (2012) claimed Data mining as most important for the

discovery of knowledge from the database. Over the last few decades the data mining is very well in the

picture and the companies and the corporates have been using it extensively to face the challenges. The

value of data mining is meaning less if it is not appropriately used for effective purposes. There are six

categories of data mining techniques like classification, regression, clustering, dependency modeling,

deviation detection and summarization. The author in this paper has undertaken a study period of five years

to know proper utilization of knowledge management.

King, W. R. (2009) observed that for centuries, scientists, philosophers and intelligent people have

been striving in creating, acquiring and communicating knowledge and improving it over the years for re

utilization. The researchers believe that it is appropriate to achieve maximum effective usage in order to

have positive influence on Organizational performance.

Akdere, M. (2009) stated that knowledge management has two aspects for the practical use i.e.,

knowledge and information. Both these things are the integral part of human resource development. To

make use of HRD practice in the work place is essential and this supports learning and performance. A

perfect link is felt between knowledge management and survival of the Organization. Quality cannot be

thought of without the involvement of knowledge management. During last couple of decades there has

been a debate to understand the nature of knowledge, utilize and consume on a daily basis in a given

Organization and it has also become a complex because of continuous progress in a technological

advancements and inventions.

Kongpichayanond, P. (2009) claimed that mergers and acquisitions has become one of the

important aspects of business strategies that Organizations adopt to help to improve the performance and

sustain competitive advantage. People believe that both are same but one is slightly different from other.

Merger is an activity when two more companies combine to form one new entity. All the assets and

liabilities available and cultural values on a equal bases different business and industries, where as

acquisition means to buy or to take over the operations of other. In acquisitions there are different options

of claiming the ownership of another country.

Daud, S., & Yusuf, W. F.W. (2008) is of the opinion that today‟s economy is not confined to a

limited geographical boundaries but more and more performances focused on concept of survival

influenced by its ability and speed in developing knowledge based competencies. Knowledge management

has the ability to protect intellectual assets on being lost and also can be practiced on a daily basis in small

and medium enterprises so that they can compete and sustain in the competitive market. Generally small

organizations do not apply the process and most of the small and medium industries have focused on the

case observations examine the perception of knowledge management between large and small enterprises.

The enterprises are focusing on market share rather than improvement of internal efficiency. Today the

world is of the computers, software, and Internet, which makes things easy as far as sharing of knowledge,

is concerned. It is cleanly observed that many industries even do not understand the concept of knowledge

management application. The process of knowledge management creates a support of problem solving,

dynamic learning, strategic planning and decision-making. Currently it is a prerequisite for every industry to

273

ISSN NO: 1301-2746


ADALYA JOURNAL


derive competitive advantage.

Kim, J. (2006) stated that knowledge has an impact in improving the organizational performance.

Generally knowledge management is referred as collection of organizational practices that is been used for

acquiring, disseminating, and sharing of ideas and knowledge in the larger interest of the Organization. To

examine the effect of qualitative and quantitative effect of knowledge management, the researchers have

conducted empirical studies. Since it‟s related to the perception of the people, primary data has been used

for the testing of the hypothesis and analyzing the results. Suggestions have been given by researchers

touching different aspects like impact of factors, like return on investment through the use of knowledge

management, balance score etc. The authors to prove the strength of their research referred many qualitative

case studies.

Flynn, B.B., Schroeder, R.G. and Sakakibara, S. (1994) stated that quality management is a

holistic process of conformance to standards at all business levels to eliminate errors and mistakes to meet

required expectations. There has been a consistent need for quality in work place due to increasing

competition, international trade, and globalization of multi-national companies. Some of the companies like

Motorola, Chrysler, General Motors, ford and ATNT power systems were serious in six-sigma approach

and the methodology of implementing the strategy.

Research Methodology:

Meaning of Research:

Research in common parlance refers to a search for knowledge. Once can also define research as a

scientific and systematic search for pertinent information on a specific topic. In fact, research is an art of

scientific investigation. Research is, thus, an original contribution to the existing stock of knowledge

making for its advancement. It is the pursuit of truth with the help of study, observation, comparison and

experiment. The systematic approach concerning generalization and the formulation of theory is also

research.

Definition of Research:

Clarke and Clarke define “Research is a careful, systematic and objective investigation conducted

to obtain valid facts, draw conclusions and established principles regarding an identifiable problem in some

field of knowledge.”

Objectives of the study:

The main objective of the study is to evaluate the impact of knowledge management on the

performance of employees in pharma industries.

To know whether the pharma industries bank upon the knowledge management policy.

To have an insight with the familiarity of knowledge management in the employees.

To know whether there is continuity of upgradation and development of knowledge management

strategies.

To evaluate whether knowledge management is successfully implemented or not.

To look into the importance of knowledge management and information technology interface.

Need for the Study:

The current corporate world is exposed to adoption of changes both professionally and technically.

Because of the diversities in the employees on the basis of their experience, educational background, they

can contribute a lot for the growth and development of the Organization through sharing of knowledge in

their respective domains.

Research Gap:

During the review of past literature, it has been observed that the knowledge management is used

for Organizational learning, management practice, effectiveness, opportunities, determining etc. However

the current study focuses on knowledge management as a tool used in the pharma industries to determine

performance appraisal of the employees working in different areas of pharma industry.

Problem statement:

In the review of literature it has been observed that employees can only contribute to any

Organization provided they have the willingness to share the knowledge what they have.

Hypothesis:

H0: Knowledge management policy has no significant impact on employee performance appraisal and

job satisfaction.

H0: Familiarity with knowledge management has no significant impact on employee performance

appraisal and job satisfaction.

H0: Strategy development in knowledge management has no significant impact on employee

performance appraisal and job satisfaction.

H0:Implementation of knowledge management has no significant impact on employee performance

appraisal and job satisfaction.

H0: The practice of information technology has no significant impact on employee performance and

274

ISSN NO: 1301-2746


ADALYA JOURNAL


----

job satisfaction.

Selection of variables:

There are two categories of variables selected for the study:

1. Independent variables:

Knowledge management policy

Familiarity with knowledge management.

Knowledge management strategy development.

Knowledge management implementation.

Knowledge management and Information technology.

2. Dependent variables:

Employee performance.

a. Performance appraisal

b. Employee job satisfaction

Research Design:

………………..…………………………..……

-

…………………………………………………

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF

RESULTS

Correlations

KMP FWKM KSD KMI KMIT EJS

KMP

Pearson Correlation 1 .088 .396** .484** .401** .845**

Sig. (2-tailed) .282 .000 .000 .000 .000

N 150 150 150 150 150 150

FWKM

Pearson Correlation .088 1 .119 .117 .436** .550**

Sig. (2-tailed) .282 .145 .154 .000 .000

N 150 150 150 150 150 150

KSD

Pearson Correlation .396** .119 1 .768** .251** .407**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .145 .000 .002 .000

N 150 150 150 150 150 150

KMI

Pearson Correlation .484** .117 .768** 1 .243** .470**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .154 .000 .003 .000

N 150 150 150 150 150 150

KMIT

Pearson Correlation .401** .436** .251** .243** 1 .573**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .002 .003 .000

N 150 150 150 150 150 150

Knowledge

management and

information technology

Knowledge implementation

Knowledge management strategy

Familiarity with

knowledge

management

Knowledge management policy

Employee job satisfaction

Employee performance appraisal

275

ISSN NO: 1301-2746


ADALYA JOURNAL


EJS

Pearson Correlation .845** .550** .407** .470** .573** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

N 150 150 150 150 150 150

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Before making the analysis of the results obtained from the tests it is essential to know whether there is

a correlation between the independent variables and it is important to know on the basis of the strength of the

responses received from the respondents.

Independent variables have been categorized into 5 categories namely-

1. KMP

2. FWKM

3. KSD

4. KMI

5. KMIT

The dependent variables selected for the study is to predict two things-

1. EJS

2. EPA

The process of testing data has been done after conducting a normality test independently and

collectively to match the frequency and to find out homogeneity and heterogeneity of the sample. It is

necessary to do this before validating the hypothesis. The collective correlation tests between the 5

independent variables along with their association with employees job satisfaction has been done and

calculated values prove that there is perfect association between 5 independent and one dependent variable.

Model Summaryb

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the

Estimate

Durbin-Watson

1 .972a .944 .942 1.680 2.187

a. Predictors: (Constant), KMIT, KMI, FWKM, KMP, KSD

b. Dependent Variable: EJS

ANOVAa

Model Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.

Regression 6905.346 5 1381.069 489.202 .000b

1 Residual 406.528 144 2.823

Total 7311.873 149

a. Dependent Variable: EJS

b. Predictors: (Constant), KMIT, KMI, FWKM, KMP, KSD

Coefficientsa

Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized

Coefficients

T Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

(Constant) -.401 .984 -.407 .684

KMP 1.005 .032 .764 31.841 .000

FWKM .673 .033 .451 20.508 .000

1

KSD .034 .043 .025 .797 .427

KMI .020 .046 .014 .434 .665

KMIT .081 .032 .060 2.500 .014


The coefficient of the regression test conducted to prove the impact of 5 independent variables and

one dependent variable employees‟ job satisfaction has given beautiful results ranging between 0.05%to

1%. So it is concluded that there is a significant impact of all five independent variables on employees‟ job

satisfaction.

276

ISSN NO: 1301-2746


ADALYA JOURNAL


Model Summaryb

Model R R Square Adjusted R

Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

Durbin-Watson

1 .972a .944 .942 1.680 2.187


b. Dependent Variable: EJS

ANOVAa


Regression 6905.346 5 1381.069 489.202 .000b

1 Residual 406.528 144 2.823

Total 7311.873 149



Coefficientsa

Model Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

T Sig

.

Collinearity Statistics

B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF

(Constant) -.401 .984 -.407 .684

KMP 1.005 .032 .764 31.841 .000 .670 1.492

FWKM .673 .033 .451 20.508 .000 .797 1.254

1

KSD .034 .043 .025 .797 .427 .405 2.468

KMI .020 .046 .014 .434 .665 .371 2.698

KMIT .081 .032 .060 2.500 .014 .672 1.488


The current table shows that the result of ANOVA tests to establish the relationship between 5

independent and one dependent variable holds good. Even the calculated coefficient values also prove that

it is essential that the job satisfaction of employees is related to multiple dimensions of knowledge

management.

Collinearity Diagnosticsa

Dimension Eigenvalue Condition

Index

Variance Proportions

(Constant) KMP FWKM KSD KMI

1

5.852

1.000

.00

.00

.00

.00

.00

2

.069

9.201

.02

.00

.11

.14

.07

3

.034

13.155

.00

.59

.20

.09

.00

4

.017

18.738

.11

.04

.14

.20

.16

5

.015

19.665

.82

.20

.51

.00

.00

6

.013

21.248

.05

.16

.04

.56

.77


The basic objective of conducting a collinearity test is to understand the degree of abnormality and

normality in the responses given by the respondents and it can be observed that all the values are supporting

the model in testing of the hypothesis.

Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

277

ISSN NO: 1301-2746


ADALYA JOURNAL


1 .845a .713 .711 3.763

a. Predictors: (Constant), KMP

ANOVAa

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Regression 5216.407 1 5216.407 368.428 .000b

1 Residual 2095.466 148 14.159

Total 7311.873 149


b. Predictors: (Constant), KMP

Coefficientsa


Coefficients

T Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

(Constant) 16.349 1.426

.845

11.462 .000

1

KMP 1.110 .058 19.194 .000


The individual tests are conducted to know the impact of independent variable on dependent

variable. In the first case the Organization having knowledge management policy will be helpful in

achieving employee job satisfaction.

Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .550a .302 .297 5.872

a. Predictors: (Constant), FWKM

ANOVAa


Regression 2207.909 1 2207.909 64.023 .000b

1 Residual 5103.964 148 34.486

Total 7311.873 149


b. Predictors: (Constant), FWKM

Coefficientsa


Coefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

(Constant) 23.663 2.474

.550

9.563 .000

1

FWKM .819 .102 8.001 .000


One more independent variable familiarity with knowledge management is selected to conduct its

impact on employees job satisfaction and since there it has significant result there is an impact of

independent variable on dependent variable.

Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .407a .166 .160 6.420

a. Predictors: (Constant), KSD

278

ISSN NO: 1301-2746


ADALYA JOURNAL


ANOVAa


Regression 1212.655 1 1212.655 29.426 .000b

1 Residual 6099.218 148 41.211

Total 7311.873 149


b. Predictors: (Constant), KSD

Coefficientsa


Coefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

(Constant) 32.704 1.985

.407

16.479 .000

1

KSD .562 .104 5.425 .000


One more ANOVA test has been conducted on the impact of knowledge strategic development on

employees job satisfaction and it is proved to be positive. So it can be assessed that there is a perfect

combination of both dependent and independent variables to establish the truth.

Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .470a .221 .215 6.205

a. Predictors: (Constant), KMI

ANOVAa


Regression 1613.728 1 1613.728 41.914 .000b

1 Residual 5698.145 148 38.501

Total 7311.873 149


b. Predictors: (Constant), KMI

Coefficientsa


Coefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

(Constant) 29.668 2.134

.470

13.905 .000

1

KMI .663 .102 6.474 .000


One more test has been conducted using knowledge management implementation policy and employee

job satisfaction and it is found to be very positive and significant in the given degree of level.

Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .573a .328 .324 5.761


279

ISSN NO: 1301-2746


ADALYA JOURNAL


ANOVAa


Regression 2400.320 1 2400.320 72.329 .000b

1 Residual 4911.553 148 33.186

Total 7311.873 149


b. Predictors: (Constant), KMIT

Coefficientsa


Coefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

(Constant) 20.926 2.648

.573

7.903 .000

1

KMIT .776 .091 8.505 .000


It is important to know that in today‟s information technology world where communication has become

very easy and accessible it is evident that use of information technology is highly beneficial for

accomplishment of task on time.

Tests of Normality

Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk

Statistic Df Sig. Statistic df Sig.

PA .087 150 .007 .976 150 .010

a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Correlations

KMP FWKM KSD KMI KMIT PA

Pearson Correlation 1 .088 .396** .484** .401** .504**

KMP Sig. (2-tailed) .282 .000 .000 .000 .000

N 150 150 150 150 150 150

Pearson Correlation .088 1 .119 .117 .436** .359**

FWKM Sig. (2-tailed) .282 .145 .154 .000 .000

N 150 150 150 150 150 150

Pearson Correlation .396** .119 1 .768** .251** .188*

KSD Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .145 .000 .002 .021

N 150 150 150 150 150 150

Pearson Correlation .484** .117 .768** 1 .243** .324**

KMI Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .154 .000 .003 .000

N 150 150 150 150 150 150

Pearson Correlation .401** .436** .251** .243** 1 .339**

KMIT Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .002 .003 .000

N 150 150 150 150 150 150

Pearson Correlation .504** .359** .188* .324** .339** 1

PA Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .021 .000 .000

280

ISSN NO: 1301-2746


ADALYA JOURNAL


N 150 150 150 150 150 150

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

In case of earlier tests as there was combined correlation tests between 5 independent variables and one

dependent variable performance appraisal on the basis of two tailed tests most of the variables whether

independent or dependent are having very good compatibility level. So further tests can be conducted on the

individual basis.

Model Summaryb


Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

Durbin-Watson

1 .612a .374 .352 6.095 1.195


b. Dependent Variable: PA

ANOVAa


Regression 3196.608 5 639.322 17.209 .000b

1 Residual 5349.686 144 37.151

Total 8546.293 149

a. Dependent Variable: PA


Coefficientsa

Model Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

T Si

g.

Collinearity Statistics

B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF

(Constant) 3.941 3.571 1.104 .272

KMP .622 .114 .437 5.430 .000 .670 1.492

FWKM .495 .119 .307 4.158 .000 .797 1.254

1

KSD -.299 .155 -.200 -1.934 .055 .405 2.468

KMI .342 .165 .224 2.072 .040 .371 2.698

KMIT .037 .118 .025 .315 .753 .672 1.488


Collinearity Diagnosticsa

Model Eigenvalue Condition

Index

Variance Proportions

Dimension (Constant) KMP FWKM KSD KMI KMIT

1 5.852 1.000 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00

2 .069 9.201 .02 .00 .11 .14 .07 .03

3 .034 13.155 .00 .59 .20 .09 .00 .01

1

4 .017 18.738 .11 .04 .14 .20 .16 .71

5 .015 19.665 .82 .20 .51 .00 .00 .00

6 .013 21.248 .05 .16 .04 .56 .77 .24


While conducting the compatibility level, of the all variables the collinearity test was conducted and it was

found the variance between the dependent and independent variables are very suitable to conduct independent

tests.

Variables Entered/Removeda

281

ISSN NO: 1301-2746


ADALYA JOURNAL


Model Variables Entered Variables

Removed

Method

1 KMPb . Enter


Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .504a .254 .249 6.565

a. Predictors: (Constant), KMP

ANOVAa


Regression 2168.059 1 2168.059 50.307 .000b

1 Residual 6378.234 148 43.096

Total 8546.293 149


b. Predictors: (Constant), KMP

Coefficientsa


Coefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

(Constant) 15.869 2.489

.504

6.377 .000

1

KMP .716 .101 7.093 .000


The ANOVA tests conducted between KMP and PA has shown a very good impact of knowledge

management policy on performance appraisal of the employees because the employees work according the

policies of the Organization.

Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .188a .036 .029 7.463

a. Predictors: (Constant), KSD

ANOVAa


Regression 303.518 1 303.518 5.450 .021b

1 Residual 8242.775 148 55.694

Total 8546.293 149


b. Predictors: (Constant), KSD

Coefficientsa


Coefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

(Constant) 27.912 2.307

.188

12.099 .000

1

KSD .281 .121 2.334 .021


The second independent variable knowledge strategic development has proved to be significant at a

given level and hence it can be said that every Organization should think of new strategies for getting better

performance from the employees.

282

ISSN NO: 1301-2746


ADALYA JOURNAL


Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .324a .105 .099 7.189


ANOVAa


Regression 896.988 1 896.988 17.355 .000b

1 Residual 7649.305 148 51.684

Total 8546.293 149


b. Predictors: (Constant), KMI

Coefficientsa


Coefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

(Constant) 23.103 2.472

.324

9.345 .000

1

KMI .494 .119 4.166 .000


The third test conducted to know the impact of KMI on performance appraisal the result has again

proved to be significant. This indicates that knowledge management policies are successfully implemented in

pharma industries, which makes performance appraisal very easy.

Model Summary


Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .339a .115 .109 7.149

a. Predictors: (Constant), KMIT

ANOVAa


Regression 981.930 1 981.930 19.212 .000b

1 Residual 7564.363 148 51.111

Total 8546.293 149


b. Predictors: (Constant), KMIT

Coefficientsa


Coefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

(Constant) 18.933 3.286

.339

5.762 .000

1

KMIT .496 .113 4.383 .000


It is equally important that in today‟s world of softwares, computers, Internet and bid data the access to

the information is very easy. Most of the industries use Data mining for making a decision. So it is essential that

283

ISSN NO: 1301-2746


ADALYA JOURNAL


information from the Organization reach to the employees so that they can be better assessed as per as the

performance is been concerned.

FINDINGS OF THE RESEARCH:

In today‟s world of globalization the transfer of information, use of assets, resources, and information

has become need of the hour. Knowledge management is a subject is widely used by all the

manufacturing and service industries very rapidly.

The employees are the real assets of the Organization who contribute a lot for the smooth running of the

Organizations and for showing the productivity and out put to the Organization.

SUGGESTIONS:

Knowledge management is a limit less subject to be applied in all most all sectors whether profit making or

non-profit making Organizations to get better out put.

Every Organization should have a very clear-cut knowledge management policy to be shared individually

or in group or with in the Organization or by the out side Organizations.

Knowledge management is benchmark to set up the standards for getting a standardized out put from the

employees.

Every employee should be aware of knowledge management practices by the Organizations to contribute

better for future growth and development.

It is equally important that the level of knowledge shared needs upgradation and also updation.

The Organization should be very clear and develop and adopt new strategies to make employees satisfy in

their jobs and give good performance.

Knowledge management is meaning less if it is not implemented in true sense for the knowledge and

awareness of the employees and as a consequence the organizations will fail in achieving the objectives.

In a fast growing world today where computers, softwares, analytics, analysis, tools and techniques are

used for quick management decision making it is important that Organization believes in ERP practices so

that the departments are interconnected and information can be shared with out any barrier and obstacles.

I am of the opinion that in a true sense knowledge management practices is to give something back to the

society in the long run which will make the corporate culture a better place to live in.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Lucy Adams, HR Disrupted: It's time for something different.

Linda Holbeche, Aligning Human Resources and Business Strategy.

Glenn Elliott & Debra Corey, Build It: The Rebel Playbook for World Class Employee Engagement.

Susan Scott, Fierce Conversations: Achieving Success at Work and in Life, One Conversation at a Time.

Zorlu Senyucel, Managing the Human Resource in the 21st Century.

284

ISSN NO: 1301-2746


ADALYA JOURNAL


References:

1. Akdere, M. (2009). The Role of Knowledge Management in Quality Management Practices: Achieving

Performance Excellence in Organizations. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 11 (3), 349-361,

DOI: 10.1177/1523422309338575.

2. Alsalim, M. S., & Mohamed, N. Y. (2013). Impact of Knowledge Management Processes on

Organizational Performance: An Empirical Study in Institute of Technical Learning - Iraq. Information and

Knowledge Management, 3 (11), 95-104.

3. Bharadwaj, S. S., Shah, S., & Raman, A. (2015). Impact of Knowledge Management Capabilities on

Knowledge Management Effectiveness in Indian Organizations, VIKALPA, 40 (4), 421-434. DOI:

10.1177/0256090915613572.

4. Daud, S., & Yusuf, W. F.W. (2008). An Empirical Study of Knowledge Management Processes in Small

and Medium Enterprises. Communications of the IBIMA, 4, 169-177.

5. Flynn, B.B., Schroeder, R.G. and Sakakibara, S. (1994). A Framework for Quality Management Research

and an Associated Measurement Instrument. Journal of Operations Management, 11, 339-

366. DOI:10.1016/S0272-6963(97)90004-8.

6. Kim, J. (2006). Measuring the Impact of Knowledge Management. IFLA Journal, 32(4): 362– 367. ISSN:

0340-0352. DOI: 10.1177/0340035206074075IFLA.

7. King, W. R. (2009). Knowledge Management and Organizational Learning. Annals of Information

Systems, 4, 3-13. DOI 10.1007/978-1-4419-0011-1_1.

8. Kongpichayanond, P. (2009). Knowledge Management for Sustained Competitive Advantage in Mergers

and Acquisition. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 11 (3), 375-387. DOI:

10.1177/1523422309339725.

9. Omo, F. O. (2015). Knowledge Management as an important tool in Organizational Management: A

Review of Literature. University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska –

Lincoln, 1-23.

10. Silwattananusarn, T., & Tuamsuk, K. (2012). Data Mining and Its Applications for Knowledge

Management: A Literature Review from 2007 to 2012. International Journal of Data Mining & Knowledge

Management Process (IJDKP), 2 (5), 13-24. DOI: 10.5121/ijdkp.2012.2502.

Author Details:

Jikku Susan Kurian

Research Scholar

Department of Business Administration

Sri Vasavi College

Erode

Tamil Nadu-638316

[email protected]

9494470771

Dr. K. Rajini

Associate Professor

Department of Business Administration

Sri Vasavi College

Erode

Tamil Nadu-638316

[email protected]

9842025013

285

ISSN NO: 1301-2746


ADALYA JOURNAL


mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Documents

The Impact of Knowledge Sharing in the Growth of Corporate