Download pdf - An Assessment of the Readiness for Knowledge Management …gsblibrary.uct.ac.za/ResearchReports/2001/HaricharanMoollan.pdf · An Assessment of the Readiness for Knowledge Management

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

An Assessment of the Readiness for Knowledge Management in the Western Cape Department of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Tourism

A Research Report

presented to

The Graduate School of Business

University of Cape Town

in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the

Masters of Business Administration Degree

by

Shanil Haricharan and Roland Moollan

November 2001

Supervisor: Mr Kurt April

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This report is not confidential. The Graduate School of Business may use it freely.

Our heartfelt thanks to our spouses, Hanne and Nichola, and baby Milan for their love support

and understanding.

We wish to thank Dr Harold Wesso, project sponsor, Alex van Breda, Nicollete Fielies, and

Lucinda Williams from the Department of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Tourism for

their co-ordination of the research project in their department. We also thank the senior

managers who participated in the interviews, and all the staff members who completed the

questionnaire. We appreciate their time and valuable insights into this research.

We are grateful to Associate Professor Trevor Wegner for his valuable advice on the data

analysis.

We are greatly indebted to Kurt April for his insightful comments and guidance on the subject

of knowledge management.

We certify that this report is our own work and all references are accurately reported.

signed:

SHANIL HARICHARAN ROLAND WILLIAM MOOLLAN

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

An Assessment of the Readiness for Knowledge Management in the Western Cape

Department of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Tourism

ABSTRACT

The knowledge-intensive economy implies a need for faster adaptation to an accelerated

change in the environment of public policies and service delivery. The Department of

Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Tourism (DEAAT), in the Provincial Government:

Western Cape, is responsible for the implementation of the Cape Online programme, through

the creation of structures, systems and processes that support e-government.

This research report assesses the knowledge management processes – creation, sharing,

application and retention – in the DEAAT to determine its readiness for knowledge

management initiatives. The research findings indicate an overall moderate level of readiness

for knowledge management with the key inhibitors being the bureaucratic structure and

organisational culture. A framework for the implementation of knowledge management

initiatives is proposed.

KEYWORDS: Knowledge, knowledge management, knowledge economy, knowledge

management processes, public sector, e-government, information and communication

technology

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 8

2 THE KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY AND E-GOVERNMENT ............................................... 10

3 PERSPECTIVES ON KNOWLEDGE ..................................................................................... 21

4 MANAGING ORGANISATIONAL KNOWLEDGE............................................................. 25

5 ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK FOR KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT .......................... 29 KNOWLEDGE CREATION ................................................................................................................................... 29

KNOWLEDGE RETENTION.................................................................................................................................. 34

KNOWLEDGE SHARING ..................................................................................................................................... 35

KNOWLEDGE APPLICATION............................................................................................................................... 36

6 THE INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT........................................................................................ 37 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (IT): ENABLER OR DRIVER ................................................................................. 37

ALIGNMENT OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT WITH BUSINESS STRATEGY ........................................................ 39

ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE............................................................................................................................. 40

COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE ............................................................................................................................. 41

7 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR............................................ 42

8 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.............................................................................................. 45 OBJECTIVES AND HYPOTHESIS.......................................................................................................................... 45

RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS: THEORETICAL UNDERPINNING ............................................................................... 46

SOURCES OF PRIMARY DATA............................................................................................................................ 49

SAMPLING PLAN 50

8.1.1 Sampling Unit Selection ................................................................................................................ 51

DATA COLLECTION 53

8.1.2 Questionnaire Design.................................................................................................................... 53

DATA ANALYSIS 56

8.1.3 Data Preparation .......................................................................................................................... 56

8.1.4 Descriptive Statistical Methods..................................................................................................... 56

8.1.5 Graphical Representations............................................................................................................ 57

8.1.6 Measures of Association................................................................................................................ 57

9 KEY FINDINGS ......................................................................................................................... 60 FACTOR ANALYSIS 61

INHIBITORS TO KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT.................................................................................................... 64

10 ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION............................................................................................... 65 CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING OF KM............................................................................................................ 65

ALIGNMENT OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT WITH BUSINESS STRATEGY ........................................................ 66

KM PROCESSES IN THE DEAAT....................................................................................................................... 68

INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY...................................................................................... 74

INTER- AND INTRA- DEPARTMENTAL INFORMATION FLOWS............................................................................. 76

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

11 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK FOR THE DEAAT.............................. 78 CREATING AWARENESS .................................................................................................................................... 78

CHOOSING KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT INITIATIVES....................................................................................... 83

12 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................... 90

13 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................... 91

14 APPENDICES APPENDIX 1: SOUTH AFRICAN GOVERNMENT'S SUPPORT FOR ICT

APPENDIX 2: WESTERN CAPE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT'S POLICY OBJECTIVES

APPENDIX 3: TRADITIONS OF WEDTERN EPISTEMOLOGY

APPENDIX 4: THE KNOWLEDGE MANGEMENT DIAGNOSTIC QUESTIONNAIRE

APPENDIX 5: DEAAT SENIOR MANAGEMENT INTERVIEWS

APPENDIX 6: DATA FROM QUESTIONNAIRES

APPENDIX 7: BOX AND WISKER PLOTS OF QUESTIONNAIRE SCORES

APPENDIX 8: FACTOR ANALYSIS RESULTS

APPENDIX 9: SCREE PLOT

APPENDIX 10: CHI SQUARED STATISTICS

APPENDIX 11: THEMES EMERGING FROM THE FACTOR ANALYSIS

APPENDIX 12: FACTOR ANALYSIS FINDINGS ON THE QUESTIONS ON KNOWLEDGE

CREATION

APPENDIX 13: FACTOR ANALYSIS FINDINGS ON THE QUESTIONS ON KNOWLEDGE SHARING


APPLICATION


RETENTION

APPENDIX 16: INTERPRETATION OF THE KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT SCORES

APPENDIX 17: GUIDELINE FOR CREATING A KNOWLEDGE ASSET

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

LIST OF TABLES

Page

TABLE 1: The transition from the industrial society to the knowledge society ......................4 TABLE 2: Readiness Guide Stages of e-government development.........................................13 TABLE 3: Two Types of knowledge .......................................................................................17 TABLE 4: Distinction between Information management and knowledge management .........32 TABLE 5: The plan from the random selection of a stratified sample.....................................44 TABLE 6: Staff number within the various branches ..............................................................45 TABLE 7: The translation of the Likert scales to the rating of the KM processes ..................47 TABLE 8: The response to the survey questionnaire...............................................................51 TABLE 9: The five major factors extracted from the raw data................................................55 TABLE 10: The theme for the factors associated with knowledge creation .............................55 TABLE 11: The theme for the factors associated with knowledge sharing ..............................56 TABLE 12: The theme for the factors associated with knowledge application ........................56 TABLE 13: The theme for the factors that is associated with knowledge retention .................56

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

RESEARCH REPORT MBA 2001

An Assessment of the Readiness for Knowledge Management in the Western Cape Department of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Tourism (DEAAT)

7

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

FIGURE 1: The benefits of participating in the networked world.............................................3 FIGURE 2: The facets of the Cape on line program..................................................................10 FIGURE 3: Logical peering network diagram for the Cape on line precint ..............................11 FIGURE 4: Framework for analysis ...........................................................................................24 FIGURE 5: Four modes of knowledge conversion....................................................................25 FIGURE 6: Knowledge sharing in organisations ......................................................................27 FIGURE 7: Classification of marketing research data..............................................................39 FIGURE 8: Profile percentage of responses according to job designation................................52 FIGURE 9: Profile percentages of the responses according to years of service........................52 FIGURE 10: The overall results of the Km processes for the DEAAT......................................53 FIGURE 11: The results for KM processes according to years of service & designation...........54 FIGURE 12: A proposed knowledge management framework for the DEAAT ........................72

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



8

1 INTRODUCTION

In the new millennium, economic opportunities will increasingly lie in people and the

knowledge they have, rather than solely in capital or natural resources. Well-educated

societies, skilled labour forces and economic systems that facilitate the acquisition of

knowledge will achieve sustainable economic growth and development. This development

has profound consequences for societies everywhere.

To usher the Western Cape into the 21st century, the Provincial Government: Western Cape

(PGWC) published a White Paper that committed it to preparing the Western Cape for the

knowledge economy. It states that "to participate successfully in the knowledge economy,

firms will need to become increasingly adept at gaining and applying knowledge, as a vital

component of the continual improvement process they must engage in to stay ahead of their

competitors" (DEAAT, 2001a: 19). For its part, the PGWC has launched an ambitious e-

government programme, Cape Online, in its drive to provide interactive online service

delivery to its constituents

Through the 1990s, concepts and practices evolved that highlighted organisational knowledge

as a critical resource, though generally poorly managed. The assumption was that if more

effort were directed to manage the processes of knowledge creation, sharing, retention, and

application, then the result would be improved organisational performance. Several

disciplines have contributed theoretical insights into how knowledge could be managed:

philosophy, epistemology, economics, information science, sociology, and management.

There is a growing need for models, frameworks, methodologies that can help management to

understand the knowledge management (KM) challenges that apply to their contexts.

This research report will attempt to assess the Department of Economic Affairs, Agriculture

and Tourism’s (DEAAT) readiness for knowledge management initiatives in its position as a

key driver of e-government in the Western Cape. The result of this assessment could lead to

greater understanding of the level of knowledge management processes already present in the

Department and a discovery of the inhibitors to these processes.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



9

This research will contribute to the almost non-existent repository of empirical studies, within

the public sector in South Africa, on knowledge management. This research report, based on

empirical research, in the Department of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Transport,

utilises a knowledge management diagnostic model, as a quantitative instrument, with the aim

of developing a KM framework. Descriptive data was also obtained from personal interviews

with top management in the DEAAT.

The authors examine responses to critical questions that underpin KM practice, such as: Does

the Department have an explicit definition of knowledge and KM? Are the knowledge

management processes of creation, sharing, application, and retention of knowledge, within

this department aligned to meeting its strategic objectives? What are the relationships and the

implications of leadership, organisational culture, information technology, business strategy,

and knowledge communities, on its knowledge management processes? How will the

DEAAT leverage its knowledge resources in implementing its e-government initiative, Cape

Online?

The answers to these questions come from understanding the nature and types of

organisational knowledge, the flow of knowledge within the organisation, and how new

knowledge is created and leveraged. The above questions highlight the importance of

assessing and understanding an organization's knowledge position, and its existing intellectual

resources. Such an understanding is needed for identifying the inhibitors to KM, and

formulating a knowledge management strategic framework.

The findings of this research indicate that is no common, explicit or accepted description of

knowledge or KM in the Department; their strategic objectives are not explicitly linked to any

knowledge management objectives; the first principal factor from the data analysis

highlighted the theme of organisational culture and interpersonal relationships; and the overall

diagnostic score indicated a moderate level of readiness for knowledge management. The key

inhibitors to KM are the bureaucratic structure and procedures, the command and control

management style, the organisational culture, and rapid technological changes.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



10

2 THE KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY AND E-GOVERNMENT

The journey toward becoming a knowledge-centric organisation begins with a discussion of

the new global knowledge world, a commitment from the top to use knowledge management

and achieve knowledge superiority, and a discussion of the benefits of being a knowledge-

centric organisation at the individual, organisational and enterprise levels.

The relatively knowledge-intensive service sector produces more than two-thirds of national

income in advanced economies (e.g., USA, Sweden, and Canada), and 57 percent of South

Africa's GDP. Other sectors, such as agriculture, mining and manufacturing are increasingly

dependent on the application of knowledge to increase production (DEAAT, 2001a).

Figure 1: The Benefits of Participating in the Networked World Source: Readiness for the Networked World: A Guide for Developing Countries: Information Technology Group, Harvard University (2001).

• Increases convenience

and choice for consumers

• Extends market reach for

businesses and supports

fair return on goods and

services

• Allows new business

models to develop

New Opportunities

• Streamlines product and

service delivery

• Increases transparency of

operations

• Reduces transaction costs

Eliminates Barriers

Promotes Efficiency

• Provides access to

information to all on the

network

• Overcomes physical and

virtual isolation

• Permits individuals to

become better informed

of government policies

WHAT ARE THE BENFITS OF PARTICIPATING IN THE NETWORKED WORLD?

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



11

To speed the transition from an industrial society, to a society based on the availability and

leverage of knowledge, it is necessary to change and adjust to the key drivers in our global

economy. Table 1 highlights the key changes and impacts on the government that this

change will drive. It represents the change drivers that the PGWC must undergo in order to

give effect to its policy pronouncements.

Industrial Society The Knowledge Society

Effects on the Market • National competition • Competition on price • Standardised products • Mass consumption • Separation of service &

manufacturing industries

• Global competition • Competition on quality • Customised products • Mass customisation • Integration of service &

manufacturing industries

Effects on production

and organisation

• Mass production • Focus on costs and short-

term gains • Job differentiation and

departmentalism • Seniority gives job security • Centralised and

hierarchical management structures

• Well-established routines

• Flexible production • Focus on innovation and

sustainability • Project work and team

work, and multi-skilling • Competence and

imagination gives job security

• Flatter and decentralised management structures

• Constant evolution of new routines and re-scripting of old routines

Effects on the means

of production

• Fixed capital as most important asset

• Manual work • IT as a supportive tool • Individual knowledge • Separated technologies and

infrastructures

• Human capital as most important asset

• Knowledge work • IT as an enabler • Sharing of knowledge • Integrated technologies

and infrastructures

Table 1: The Transition from the Industrial Society to the Knowledge Society: Key Drivers

Source: Adapted from the Department of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Tourism. (Western Cape Knowledge Economy White Paper, 2001a)

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



12

The knowledge economy therefore involves fundamentally new ways of working, new

management practices, new competencies amongst employees and a new role for government

and its regulatory agencies. So what does this mean for the public sector in South Africa?

The following challenges faces the government in its pursuit to manage knowledge and to

embrace e-government:

To integrate disparate kinds of knowledge from across functional and organisational

boundaries to create real innovations;

To integrate political and administrative knowledge to improve decision-making and

accountability;

To access and internalise non-traditional knowledge (particularly important where roles

are changing and the fundamental knowledge base is shifting and is displacing

foundational knowledge);

To integrate community knowledge into the production of local services;

To define the role of the provincial government in societal learning and knowledge

management for the region as a whole.

Using the main drivers of e-government - service to citizen and business, cost efficiencies,

economic development, and e-communities - activities and service delivery methods must be

reviewed and reshaped. This will allow the government to take advantage of both the

opportunities presented by the information and communication revolution, and to respond to

the changing demands on the Western Cape (such as the expansion of the service sector, its

demand of a workforce with high-level cognitive skills and continuous learning, and

entrepreneurship and innovation) as it seeks to compete in the knowledge economy of the 21st

Century.

Leaders in many developed countries have placed strong emphasis on the potential of e-

commerce to act as an engine of growth. However, it is only relatively recently that South

African government policy makers have begun to look at the potential of applying the tools

and techniques of e-commerce to the tasks of government. What is the national government's

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



13

understanding of e-government? The E-Commerce Green Paper, published by the national

Department of Communication, defines e-government in more specific terms as “government

use of information communication technologies to offer citizens and businesses the

opportunity to interact and conduct business with government … It is about how government

organises itself; its administration, rules, regulations and frameworks set out to carry out

service delivery and to co-ordinate, communicate and integrate processes within itself”

(Department of Communications, 2001:101).

There are numerous success stories in e-government, with Singapore recognised as current best

practice. The US-based, North Carolina state portal is acknowledged as the best e-government

online portal. Great Britain, Australia, as well as Singapore represent examples of the e-

government provision of portals as a single point of entry, internally and externally, for services

from multiple departments. As governments adjust to the concept of a single point of entry,

they are beginning to rethink how they interact with constituents. Rather than organising the

user's experience around departmental or agency boundaries, they are breaking down these

boundaries to organise information and interactions around the user's needs, e.g., according to

“life events” (Harvard Policy Group, 2001).

Deloitte Research (2000) launched a comprehensive global research initiative in 250 state-level

government departments in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the

United States, focusing on their e-government approaches to customer service. These

governments put more staff on the front lines and set up call centres and informational Web

sites. The most common results of these efforts have been easier customer access (experienced

by 83 percent of the governments), more public recognition of the department (63 percent) and

increases in the number of customers served (57 percent).

Studies by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's (OECD) Public

Management Committee (PUMA), and the comprehensive report by Accenture, the Markle

Foundation and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) (2001) show that

developing countries are making huge investments into ICT, implementing e-government

initiatives, and introducing knowledge management techniques in their public sector, with

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



14

innovative examples, such as public kiosks for online transactions in obtaining a variety of

licences and the payment of rates and taxes in Vijayawada, a small town in India.

President Thabo Mbeki has explicitly supported the development of e-government (Sunday

Times, 28/10/01; Business Day, 23/10/01) as well as the wide adoption of information and

communication technology (ICT) in the country (Appendix 1) emphasising the priority of

this sector and the South African government's commitment to harness the potential of ICT's

for development, the President announced, in his State of the Nation address, on the 9th of

February 2001, the establishment of a Presidential Task Force on Information Society and

Development and a National Commission on the Information Society and Development

(ISD).

The Task Force is made up of some of the world's most influential IT leaders, including the

CEO of SAP AG Hasso Plattner, Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina, and Rob Lloyd, Cisco

Systems's Europe and Africa President. The central focus of the Task Force is to assist the

SA government in developing an accelerated ISD strategic framework, identifying barriers

and constraints as well as critical resources required in the future. The first meeting of the

Task Force, held in October 2001, represented President Mbeki's first decisive step towards

developing a well co-ordinated ICT strategy.

A number of national government departments have been addressing the issue of the ICT

revolution. This includes the E-Commerce Green Paper published by the Department of

Communications, Electronic Government - The Digital Future IT Policy Framework by the

Department of Public Service and Administration as well as the White Paper on Science &

Technology by the Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology.

Furthermore, e-government is an application of the principles of Batho Pele (People First)

White Paper on Transforming Public Service Delivery (1997). The purpose of the Batho Pele

White Paper is to provide a policy framework and a practical implementation strategy for the

transformation of Public Sector delivery. Of the eight principles of Batho Pele, ‘providing

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



15

more and better information’, and ‘increasing openness and transparency’ (DPSA, 1997: 19-

20) have major implications for e-government strategies.

However, e-government is much more than just another vehicle for government-citizen

interaction, and much broader than just e-commerce or e-business for government. The real

power of e-government lies in its transforming character, i.e., to harness information and

communication technology, adopt new approaches to human resources, re-engineer business

processes, in order to optimise the government’s performance in a knowledge-based

economy. For e-government efforts to be effective and sustainable, it is essential that strong

connections between the front- and the back offices be maintained. Otherwise, the front-end

showcases that mask internal chaos will lose its potential for better service delivery.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



16

THE CAPE ONLINE PROGRAMME

To prepare the people of the Western Cape for the knowledge economy of the 21st Century is

one of the PGWC provincial policy goals. The Department of Economic Affairs, Agriculture

and Tourism (DEAAT) is responsible for the implementation of the Cape Online programme,

which is expected to specifically address this goal, through the creation of structures, systems

and processes that support e-government. The DEAAT is focusing on the use of ICT to

improve the efficiency and effectiveness government services delivery, and to promote co-

operation and collaboration in the development and operation of ICT between all sectors.

The Knowledge Economy and E-Government (KEE-G) centre, currently in the establishment

phase, will give effect to the Cape Online strategy. This strategy has been designed as a result

of detailed investigation and research, during February-May 2001, into the opportunities that

exist for moving the PGWC forward into the knowledge economy. Currently, the PGWC has

68 000 employees, of which only 7% have access to email (DEAAT, 2001b).

The Cape Online Programme spans the entire PGWC, as well as national government

departments (e.g., Communications, Education, Trade and Industry), parastatals (e.g.,

Telkom) and organizations (e.g., UUNET, City of Cape Town, Wesgro, Bridges. For most

part, its customers would be the citizens in the Western Cape, staff members within the

PGWC, as well as other departments, and institutions to whom they provide a service.

The proposed internal core projects: Cape View, Cape Change, Cape Net, Cape Gateway, and

Cape Procure contribute toward the fulfilment of the requirements of the policy objectives of

the Province, both at the macro level and at the departmental level (Appendix 2).

Furthermore, its potential external role in the development of the ICT industry, supporting

online communities, such as Elsenburg, and ICT skills development is part of its strategy.

These facets of the Cape Online programme are illustrated in Figure 2 below.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



17

ICT SectorDevelopment

OnlineCommunities

Khanya,Elsenburg

ICT tertiaryskillsdevelopment

ICT forcommunities

CORE INTERNAL INITIATIVES

Cape Gateway

Cape Change Cape Net

Cape View

VISION: To develop an innovative environment that facilitates a competitive knowledge-based economy that uplifts the economy and enhances the quality of life for our people

MISSION: Enabling government to harness the capabilities of the Internet, to grow the appropriate use of ICT, increase internal efficiencies and provide a better service to its citizens as a pathway to e-Government

Externalinitiatives

Figure 2: Facets of the Cape Online ProgrammeSource: Adapted from the Department of Economic Affairs, Tourism and Agriculture. Cape OnlineProgramme Discussion Document Version 3. 2001b

The overall timeline for the Cape Online development projects are three years. This is an

approximate timeline, as projects will be constantly evaluated by the Knowledge Economy

and E-Government (KEE-G) Centre in the PGWC, against the targets set by the Cape Online

strategy and programme plan, as well as specific criteria to be established when appropriate.

A number of Cape Online projects will evolve into operational entities. On completion of the

first development cycle of these entities or products it will be considered by the KEE-G

Centre for adoption.

The PGWC has approved the business plan of Cape Gateway, one of the core projects. It

aims at creating an e-government portal where all users - citizens and business - will be able

to access all government information from a single point - a virtual and physical gateway to

the Cape. Currently an e-government portal template is under consideration by all the

departments in the PGWC. The launch of the portal is planned for the second half of 2002.

The government does not provide any online services at this point.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



18

Cape Net is a project with the goal to create a regional parastatal peering network or exchange

point (also referred to as a network precinct). This network would enable inter-government

organisational data exchange to bypass the commercial Internet networks. This project hopes

to see a capability within the government to develop and grow a viable precinct, which will

begin with parastatal organisations. Currently, there are discussions with the role players in

the ICT sector on the modalities of the network precinct.

SITA

PGWC

UUNET

InternetSolutionsDidata

Telkom

Unicity Tenet HEIST

CINX - Cape

Internet Exchange Point

Commercial Internet Provincial Govt. Peering Network Private Commercial Peering

Figure 3: Logical peering network diagram for the Cape Online Precinct

Source: Department of Economic Affairs, Tourism and Agriculture. Cape Online Programme Discussion Document Version 3. 2001b

As the government strives towards fulfilling its role in the building of the knowledge

economy, the internal and external changes in technology, structures, processes, and the

nature of day-to-day work will change. In order to facilitate the success of this process, it is

essential to educate, promote and adapt internal role players across the organisation.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



19

This requires the organisation to address both its own internal operations, as well as the way

in which its services are delivered to its customers. It is anticipated that the online projects at

the PGWC will have a high impact on all business processes, and the job descriptions of

every employee, especially from a skills perspective. Concern from the KEE-G and other

stakeholders are frequently expressed around the capacity of the organisation to manage the

necessary change.

To this end, Cape Change is a change management project that identifies aspects of PGWC

processes, procedures, mechanisms and structures that will need to change, both to bring into

effect e-government, and those that will become necessary as result of successful e-

government. The project aims to prepare management and administration, as well as all

employees, for the challenges of the networked economy. Aspects of this project will include

workshops, business process analysis, development and delivery of training, restructuring and

integration, organisational development, and one-on-one executive mentoring.

Even though this is considered a crucial underpinning project, that will determine the success

of the other projects, there is no indication that this project is being implemented. In realising

the Cape Change project, it will be important to develop consensus on the change processes

that are necessary in the short- and longer-term, and issues such as job roles, business

processes, education and training, should be addressed with a knowledge management

perspective in mind.

Using the Readiness for the Networked World Guide, designed by the Information

Technologies Group at Harvard University (2001), the PGWC points out that it is presently at

Stage 3 of e-government. Table 2 outlines the key elements for each stage of readiness. The

minimum necessary condition for the development of e-government is access to an adequate

network infrastructure. While the strategy focuses on the importance of citizens and

businesses having access, it acknowledges that it must start with the government itself.

The challenge facing the PGWC is to make the shift from its current inadequate Web site,

which provides modest information to an interactive website or portal that allows the public to

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



20

conduct transactions, e.g., apply for permits, pay taxes, online. Furthermore, they will have to

make online services accessible to the majority of the population that have no access to online

facilities, through innovative initiatives such as public kiosks.

E-Government

Stag

e 1

No Governmental resources are online. There is no awareness of online government, and all dealings between government

and citizens or businesses are in person or paper-based. There is limited information available by phone.

Stag

e 2

A few governmental websites exist, providing basic information, often directed at

parties outside of the community. This information is static and infrequently updated. Some limited interaction with the government is possible by telephone or fax. The government distributes some information about services, procedures, rights and

responsibilities in hard copy.

Stag

e 3

Some governmental agencies post key information on websites, including directories

of services, hours of operation, and downloadable forms. Information is often not kept current and relevant. Transactions take place primarily in person, by fax or by telephone, though electronic

mail may expedite the process. The government manages relationships with some contractors and suppliers online or

with other electronic mediation.

Stag

e 4

All governmental agencies post key information on websites and some have

incorporated the Web into their strategy for interaction with the public. Interactive government websites allow the public to conduct transactions (e.g., apply

for permits, pay taxes) online. Much government procurement and many interactions with suppliers take place

online or with other electronic mediation. Table 2: Readiness Guide Stages of E-Government Development Source: Readiness for the Networked World: A Guide for Developing Countries: Information Technology Group, Harvard University (2001)

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



21

3 PERSPECTIVES ON KNOWLEDGE

Knowledge is widely understood today as a necessary and sustainable source of effectiveness,

efficiency and competitiveness. In an era characterised by rapid change and uncertainty,

successful organisations are those that consistently create new knowledge, disseminate it

through the organisation and embody it in technologies, products and services. Thus

knowledge is displacing capital, natural resources and labour as the basic economic resource

(Drucker, 1995; Nonaka, and Takeuchi, 1995; Davenport, 1999).

In Western philosophy there has been a long tradition to separate the subject who knows from

the object that is known. René Descartes, the 17th century French philosopher and

mathematician, proposed the "Cartesian split" between subject and object, mind and body.

This tradition shaped the disciplines of economics, management and organisation theory,

which has affected managerial thinking about, and approaches to, knowledge for the past two

centuries (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995; Fitzgerald, 1995).

Consequently, any understanding of the diverse views of knowledge, as discussed in the

current management and organizational literature, necessitates charting the history of Western

epistemology, i.e., the philosophical enquiry of knowledge (Refer to Appendix 3). This will

enable us to uncover some assumptions about knowledge that underlie organizational

knowledge management.

Knowledge is a broad and abstract notion that has defined epistemological debate in Western

philosophy since the classical Greek era. There has been a long and substantial body of

reflection on the nature of knowledge dating from Aristotle and Plato. There are two

dominant epistemological traditions in Western philosophy: rationalism and empiricism,

which differ on the actual source of knowledge (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995). The debate

centred on three major problems: (a) the nature of knowledge, (b) the origin of knowledge,

and (c) the reliability of knowledge.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



22

The Cartesian dualism lies at the root of Western social sciences, including economics,

management and organisational theory. The modern epistemological tradition is

characterised by philosophies that have attempted to overcome the Cartesian dualism: from

Immanuel Kant and Chester Barnard to Edgar Schein and Peter Drucker.

The point is simply that there are many different types of knowledge and that harnessing,

developing and sharing the different kinds of knowledge require very different tools and

techniques. These different views of knowledge lead to different perceptions of knowledge

management.

Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995: 58) have defined knowledge as "a dynamic human process of

justifying personal belief toward the truth" that increases an entity’s capacity for effective

action. Karl Wigg (in Beckman, 1999: 1-6), one of KM's most prominent advocates, defines

knowledge as "consisting of truths and beliefs, perspectives and concepts, judgements and

expectations, methodologies and know-how." Then, knowledge may be viewed from several

perspectives (1) a state of mind, (2) an object, (3) a process, (4) a condition of having access

to information, or (5) a capability.

Quinn (in Beckman, 1999: 1-4) refer to knowledge as "declarative (know-about or knowledge

by acquaintance), procedural (know-how), causal (know-why), conditional (know-when), and

relational (know-with)." Some authors, most notably in IT literature, address the question of

defining knowledge by distinguishing among knowledge, information, and data. A

commonly held view with sundry minor variants is that data is raw numbers and facts,

information is processed data, and knowledge is authenticated information.

Tuomi (in Alavi and Leidner, 2001) argues that the often-assumed hierarchy from data to

knowledge is actually inverse: knowledge must exist before information can be formulated

and before data can be measured to form information. As such, "raw data" do not exist - the

thought or knowledge processes that led to its identification and collection have already

influenced even the most elementary piece of "data". Thus, knowledge exists which, when

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



23

articulated, verbalized, and structured, becomes information which, when assigned a fixed

representation and standard interpretation, becomes data.

Central to Tuomi's argument is the fact that knowledge does not exist outside of an agent (a

knower): it is indelibly shaped by one's needs as well as one's initial stock of knowledge.

Knowledge is thus the result of cognitive processing triggered by the inflow of new stimuli.

Cognitive complexity is defined as the degree of differentiation of one's constructs system,

and the tendency to construe social behaviour in a multidimensional way. A more cognitively

complex individual has available a more versatile system for perceiving and processing

complex and ambiguous information better than less cognitively complex individuals

(Brooks, in April 2001). How does cognitive complexity aid knowledge creation? By

creatively and thoroughly analysing a situation or problem, they can develop creative ideas

and solutions; and, by considering different points of view, they can understand their

constituents, and related groups.

Information is converted to knowledge once it is processed in the mind of individuals and

knowledge becomes information once it is articulated and presented in the form of text,

graphics, words, or other symbolic forms. A significant implication of this view of knowledge

is that for individuals to arrive at the same understanding of data or information, they must

share a certain knowledge base.

Nonaka (1994) explicated two dimensions of knowledge in organisations: epistemological

(tacit and explicit) and ontological (individual, group, organisational, inter-organisational

levels). The origin of the concepts of tacit and explicit knowledge is from Michael Polanyi,

dating back to the 1960s. Rooted in action, experience, and involvement in a specific context,

the tacit knowledge is comprised of both cognitive and technical elements. The cognitive

element refers to an individual's mental models consisting of mental maps, beliefs, paradigms,

and viewpoints. The technical component consists of concrete know-how, crafts, and skills

that apply to a specific context.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



24

Explicit knowledge is articulated, codified, and communicated in symbolic form and/or

natural language. An example is an owner's manual accompanying the purchase of an

electronic product. The manual contains knowledge on the appropriate operation of the

product. Table 3 differentiates these two dimensions of knowledge.

Tacit Knowledge (Subjective) Explicit Knowledge (Objective)

Knowledge of experience (body) Simultaneous knowledge (here and now) Analogue knowledge (practice)

Knowledge of rationality (mind) Sequential knowledge (there and

then) Digital knowledge (theory)

Table 3: Two types of Knowledge

Source: Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995

The tacit-explicit knowledge classification is widely cited in the literature; although sundry

other knowledge classifications exist that avoid the complex subtleties of the tacit-explicit

dimension.

Four major points emerge from the above discussion:

(a) A great deal of emphasis is given to understanding the difference among data,

information, and knowledge and drawing implications from the difference.

(b) Because knowledge is personalized, in order for an individual's or a group's

knowledge to be useful for others, it must be expressed in such a manner as to be

interpretable by the receivers.

(c) Hoards of information are of little value; only that information which is actively

processed in the mind of an individual through a process of reflection, enlightenment,

or learning, in a specific context, can be useful.

(d) Knowledge is about belief, truth, and commitment, thus differentiating it from

information. Knowledge is perspective and intention dependent.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



25

4 MANAGING ORGANISATIONAL KNOWLEDGE

The major implication of the various conceptions of knowledge is that each perspective

suggests a different strategy for managing knowledge, and a different perspective of the role of

systems in support of knowledge management. Organisational knowledge and knowledge

management are popular topics in several current literatures, including strategic management

and organisational theory, as well as information systems. The emergence of the knowledge

economy, and recognition of the value of knowledge as a key "factor of production", has seen a

growing literature, and practice that has sought to operationalise new categories of knowledge.

However, knowledge management as a conscious practice is a product of the 1990s' and the

emerging recognition of the critical importance of knowledge as a key factor in organisational

success. In the past few years, however, there has been a growing interest in treating knowledge

as a significant organisational resource.

Between 1997 and 1998, the Cranfield School of Management in England (1998), analysed

questionnaires from several hundred CEOs, Managing Directors, Chairmen, and the like. The

surveys showed that they all expected to be spending money on knowledge management.

Ninety-four percent believed that it requires people to share what they know, and 85 percent

agreed that information should not be on a need-to-know basis. Eighty-five percent also

believe that value can be attached to business knowledge and over 90 percent had plans to

acquire and exploit knowledge assets. Eighty-five percent asserted that knowledge is not the

extension of information systems or information technology.

There are many definitions of knowledge management in the academic literature. They all have

certain key concepts and elements such as “knowledge or intellectual assets”, “wealth or profit

generation”, “processes” and “organisational objectives.” A few examples of these definitions

follow:

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



26

Bukowitz and Williams (1999: 6) define knowledge management “as the process by which the

organisation generates wealth from its intellectual or knowledge-based assets.”

Snowden (1999: 42) provides a comprehensive definition of knowledge management as the

“developing body of methods, tools, techniques and values, through which organisations can

acquire, develop, measure, distribute and provide a return on their intellectual assets. It is

fundamentally about creating self sustaining ecologies which communities and their artefacts

can organically respond to, and confidently pro-act with an increasingly uncertain

environment.”

According to Skyrme (1999: 59), knowledge management is the “explicit and systematic

management of vital knowledge and its associated processes of creating, organising, diffusion, use

and exploitation, in pursuit of organisational objectives.”

While much theory exists on knowledge management, little empirical work has been

undertaken, especially in South Africa. Hence, there is a large gap in the body of knowledge in

this area, and even less with regard to government bodies and knowledge management.

Organisations like the OECD and the UNDP that seek to analyse and develop solutions to the

common challenges and needs of governments, have contributed to the literature through their

work on public governance that includes knowledge management, and e-government.

While there is evidence that most leading private sector firms are now actively pursuing

knowledge management, many doubt that the same systematic organisational changes are

taking place in public service organisations of most OECD countries. If this is true,

governments are at risk of falling behind leading-edge companies in managing their

knowledge. This could affect the competitiveness of public organisations and countries, and

lead to a reduction in citizens' trust in public institutions.

Over the past few years, a growing number of companies have focused on their intellectual assets

and have introduced a variety of knowledge management programmes so as to improve

performance levels and achieve competitive advantage. The most notable companies that have

successfully harnessed its knowledge through a range of innovations, as covered in the literature,

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



27

are, amongst others, Skandia Assurance and Financial Services, Netscape, Microsoft, Sun

Microsystems, American Airlines, 3M, Dow Chemical, Asea Brown Boveri, BP Amoco and

General Electric (Probst, Raub, and Romhardt, 1998; Skyrme, 1999; Stewart, 2001).

Grover and Davenport (2001) note that the most visible development in KM is the employment of

knowledge specialists such as knowledge managers or chief knowledge officers (CKO). The CKO

must change culture by example, creating models, lighting fires and linking KM to measurable

goals to overcome barriers to change. On the operational side, the CKO serves as the chief

designer of the knowledge architecture. Thus, they have both symbolic and operational roles.

Generally, a cadre of knowledge managers, tasked with knowledge activities, supports the CKO.

According to Davenport and Prusak (1998), most knowledge management projects have one of

three aims:

(a) To make knowledge visible and show the role of knowledge in an organization, mainly

through maps, yellow pages, and hypertext tools.

(b) To develop a knowledge-intensive culture by encouraging and aggregating behaviours such as

knowledge sharing (as opposed to hoarding) and proactively seeking and offering knowledge

(c) To build a knowledge infrastructure - not only a technical system, but a web of connections

among people given space, time, tools, and encouragement to interact and collaborate.

Organisations can receive important benefits from knowledge management. To be successful, an

organisation's approach must fit both the culture and the specific business objectives of that

organisation (Seeley and Dietrick, 2000). Organizations can achieve spectacular results, but these

positive outcomes must be paid for through significant investments of time, energy, and resources.

Many organizations that have achieved success through their knowledge management efforts share

the view that the investment was worth the effort (Coates, 2001; Schein, 2000).

Knowledge management is largely regarded as an initiative involving various activities. Slight

discrepancies in the delineation of the processes appear in the literature (Probst, Raub, Romhardt,

1998; Beckman, 1999; Bukowitz and Williams, 2000; Alavi and Leidner, 2001), namely in terms

of the number and labelling of processes rather than the underlying concepts. At a minimum, one

considers the four basic processes of creating, retaining, sharing, and applying knowledge. These

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



28

major processes can be subdivided, for example, into creating internal knowledge, acquiring

external knowledge, storing knowledge in documents versus storing in routines as well as updating

the knowledge, and sharing knowledge internally and externally.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



29

5 ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK FOR KNOWLEDGE

MANAGEMENT

We have developed a systematic framework that will be used to analyse the organizational

knowledge management processes (Refer to Figure 4). It is based on the view of organizations

as social collectives and "knowledge systems" (Alavi and Leidner, 2001). According to this

framework, organisations as knowledge systems consist of four sets of socially enacted

knowledge processes: (a) creation, (b) retention, (c) transfer, and (d) application. This view of

organizations as knowledge systems represents both the cognitive and social nature of

organizational knowledge and its embodiment in the individual's cognition and practices as

well as the collective (i.e., organizational) practices and culture. These processes do not

represent a monolithic set of activities, but an interconnected and intertwined set of activities.

Although the concept of coding, storing, and transmitting knowledge in organizations is not

new - training and employee development programs, organisational policies, routines,

procedures, reports, and manuals have served this function for years - organisational and

managerial practice has recently become more knowledge-focused. Spender (1996) points to

benchmarking, knowledge audits, best practice transfer, and employee development point to the

realisation of the importance of organisational knowledge and intangible assets in general.

Knowledge Creation

Organisational knowledge creation involves developing new content, or replacing existing

content, within the organization's tacit and explicit knowledge. Through social (e.g., creative

dialogue, organisational culture) and collaborative processes (e.g., communities of practice) as

well as an individual's cognitive processes (e.g., reflection), knowledge is created, shared,

amplified, enlarged, and justified in organizational settings (Nonaka, 1994). This model views

organizational knowledge creation as involving a continual interplay between the tacit and

explicit dimensions of knowledge and a growing spiral flow as knowledge moves through

individual, group, and organizational levels. Four modes of knowledge creation have been

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



30

identified: socialisation, externalisation, internalisation, and combination (Nonaka and

Takeuchi, 1995).

OP

RIG

HT U

CT

TACIT KNOWLEDGE

Quality Management

t

Change Management

e

Leadership

Create

Apply

Share

E

E

= BARRIERS

EXPLICIT KNOWLEDGE

C

t

t

Interdepartmental Co-operation

Communication

Teamwork

Problem Solving

Systems/Administration

Technological Managemen

Financial Managemen

Information Management

NORMATIVE

RE

An Assessment of Western Cape Departm

Figure 4:

STRATEGIC

SEARCH REPORT MBA 2001

the Readiness for Knowledge Management in the ent of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Tourism

Framework for Analysis

OPERATIONAL

Continuous Improvement

Networking

Marketing

Capacity/Succession

(D

Flexibility

Risk Managemen

Customer Satisfaction

Learning Culture

Governanc

Information technology

Business Strategy

YKNOWLEDGE BASE

Assessment
CONTEXT Retain
T

I

M

T

I

M

EAAT)

31

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



32

The socialisation mode refers to conversion of tacit knowledge to new tacit knowledge

through social interactions and shared experience among organizational members (e.g.,

apprenticeship, mentorship, COPs). The combination mode refers to the creation of new

explicit knowledge by merging, categorizing, reclassifying, and synthesizing existing explicit

knowledge (e.g., literature survey reports). The other two modes involve interactions and

conversion between tacit and explicit knowledge. Externalisation refers to converting tacit

knowledge to new explicit knowledge (e.g., articulation of best practices or lessons learned).

Internalisation refers to creation of new tacit knowledge from explicit knowledge (e.g., the

learning and understanding that results from reading or discussion). The latter is illustrated in

Figure 5 below.

TACIT KNOWLEDGE To EXPLICIT KOWLEDGE

TACIT

KNOWLEDGE

From

EXPLICIT

KNOWLEDGE

Figure 5: Four modes of knowledge conversion

Source: Adapted from Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995

Socialisation

Sympathised knowledge Connected with theories of group

processes and organisational culture Process of sharing experiences Shared mental models and technical

skills Examples: apprenticeship, on-the-

job training, communities of practice

Externalisation

Conceptual Knowledge

Driven by metaphors, analogy, concepts, hypothesis and models

Triggered by dialogue or collective reflection

Holds the key to knowledge creation

Examples: abductive reasoning, new product development

Internalisation

Operational Knowledge

Embodying explicit knowledge into tacit knowledge

"Learning by doing" Through documents, manuals, or

oral stories Example: Project management,

success stories

Combination

Systemic Knowledge

Systemising concepts into knowledge systems

Combining different bodies of explicit knowledge through documents, meetings, internet

Example: Prototype, formal education and training

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



33

Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995: viii) contend that Japanese companies have become successful

because of their skills and expertise in organisational knowledge creation, i.e., "the capability

of a company as a whole to create new knowledge, disseminate it throughout the organisation,

and embody it in products, services, and systems." Knowledge creation takes place at four

levels: the individual, the group, the organisational, and inter-organisational levels.

Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) contend that Japanese companies have existed in an uncertain

environment over the past 50 years. They were forced into continuous innovation to survive

through anticipating changes in the market, technology, competition, or product. These

companies viewed change as an everyday event and a positive force. In contrast, some of the

big Western companies like IBM and General Motors became insular, seeking predictability

and stability. Japanese companies, in times of uncertainty sought knowledge from the

outside, which is shared widely within the organisation, stored as part of the company's

knowledge base, and utilised in developing new technologies and products.

Western organisations take for granted a view of the organisation as a machine for

information processing. This is the dominant view of Western management that comes from

Frederick Taylor. In this view knowledge is necessarily explicit - formal and systematic.

Japanese companies view knowledge differently: explicit knowledge represents only a

fraction, while tacit knowledge is viewed as primary. The latter is not easily visible and

expressible. "Tacit knowledge is highly personal and hard to formalise, making it difficult to

communicate or to share with others" (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995: 8). Organisational

knowledge is created during the conversion from tacit to explicit, and back again into tacit.

The recognition of tacit knowledge gives rise to a whole different view of the organisation -

not as a machine for processing information but as a living organism. Highly subjective

insights, intuitions, and hunches are a key part of knowledge. It also embraces ideals, values,

and emotion, as well as symbols and images.

YRIG

HT U

CT

Knowledge Retention

Empirical studies (Darr, 1995, Grover and Davenport, 2001) have shown that while

organisations create knowledge and learn, they also forget (i.e., do not remember, or lose

track of, the acquired knowledge). Thus, the storage, organisation, and retrieval of

organisational knowledge, also referred to as organisational memory constitute an important

aspect of effective organizational knowledge management (Bannon and Kuutti, 2001).

Organisational memory includes knowledge residing in various component forms, including

written documentation, structured information stored in electronic databases, codified human

knowledge stored in expert systems, documented organisational procedures and processes and

tacit knowledge acquired by individuals and networks of individuals.

Early attempts in many organizations to capture institutional memory, as knowledge workers

retired, often led to the development of huge electronic data warehouses. But these were little

more than the electronic equivalent of fossils preserved in amber. Data mining does not equal

knowledge, and at best we have only "knowledge ghosts" when people leave our

organizations (Seeley and Dietrick, 2000). Other organizations introduced modern forms of

apprenticeship and coaching to ensure the person-to-person transfer of as much knowledge as

possible.

COP



34

Figure 6: Knowledge sharing in organizations Source: Kurt April, Knowledge Management Elective, MBA Programme, GSB UCT (2001)

Intermediation

Externalisation Internalisation

Knowledge provider

Knowledge seeker

External repository

Intermediation

Externalisation Internalisation

Knowledge provider

Knowledge seeker

External repository

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



35

Knowledge Sharing

An important process in knowledge management is that of knowledge sharing or transfer.

Transfer occurs at various levels: transfer of knowledge between individuals, from individuals

to explicit sources, from individuals to groups, between groups, across groups, and from the

group to the organisation.

Considering the distributed nature of organisational cognition, an important process of

knowledge management in organisational settings is the transfer of knowledge to locations

where it is needed and can be used. However, this is not a simple process, in that

organisations often do not know what they know and have weak systems for locating and

retrieving knowledge that reside in them (Alavi and Leidner, 2001).

Communication processes and information flows drive knowledge transfer in organisations.

Gupta and Govindarajan (2000) have conceptualised knowledge transfer (knowledge flows in

their terminology) in terms of five elements:

(a) Perceived value of the source unit's knowledge.

(b) Motivational disposition of the source (i.e., their willingness to share knowledge).

(c) Existence and richness of transmission channels.

(d) Motivational disposition of the receiving unit (i.e., their willingness to acquire

knowledge from the source).

(e) The absorptive capacity of the receiving unit, defined as the ability not only to acquire

and assimilate but also to use knowledge.

The least controllable element is the fifth: knowledge must go through a recreation process in

the mind of the receiver. This recreation depends on the recipient's cognitive capacity to

process the incoming stimuli.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



36

Knowledge Application

An important aspect of the knowledge-based theory of the firm is that the source of

competitive advantage resides in the application of the knowledge, rather than in the

knowledge itself. Grant (1996) identifies three primary mechanisms for the integration of

knowledge to create organisational capability:

• Directives: refer to the specific set of rules, standards, procedures, and instructions

developed through the conversion of specialists' tacit knowledge to explicit and

integrated knowledge for efficient communication to non-specialists. A practical

workplace example of this would be standard operating procedures and handbooks.

• Organisational routines: refer to the development of task performance and co-

ordination patterns, interaction protocols, and process specifications that allow

individuals to apply and integrate their specialized knowledge without the need to

articulate and communicate what they know to others. This, in an organisation, can

be evidenced in professionals such as engineers, and technologists.

• Self-contained task teams: in situations in which task uncertainty and complexity

prevent the specification of directives and organizational routines, teams of

individuals with prerequisite knowledge and specialty are formed for problem

solving. Examples of such teams are found in strategy, operations, and IT.

To summarise, this section has described and elaborated on a knowledge management

framework based on the view of organisations as knowledge systems. One of the important

implications of this framework is that knowledge management consists of a dynamic and

continuous set of processes and practices embedded in individuals, as well as in groups and

physical structures. At any point in time, and in any part of a given organization, individuals

and groups may be engaged in several different aspects and processes of knowledge

management. Thus, knowledge management is not a discrete, independent, and monolithic

organizational phenomenon. Another implication of this framework is that the four

knowledge processes of creation, retention, transfer, and application are essential to effective

organisational knowledge management.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



37

6 THE INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT

Information Technology (IT): Enabler or Driver

“Computers are incredibly fast, accurate and stupid; humans are incredibly slow, inaccurate

and brilliant; together they are powerful beyond imagination” - Albert Einstein

There is debate as to whether information technology inhibits or facilitates knowledge creation

and use. On the one hand, some argue that capturing knowledge in a KM system inhibits

learning (Cole, 1998; Coates, 2001) and may result in the same knowledge being applied to

different situations even when it might not be appropriate. Proponents of this view maintain

that IT plays a limited role in knowledge creation, because IT is only helpful if an individual

knows what he or she is looking for. In this case, little new knowledge creation can occur.

Admonitions against an emphasis on IT at the expense of the social and cultural facets of KM

are not uncommon (Davenport and Prusak, 1998; Schein, 2000).

According to Coates (2001: 13), knowledge management is primarily a person-to-person

activity. He is emphatic about the role of IT in knowledge management: “It's not a matter of

tools, techniques or electronics. It's not an IT problem. Keep the chief information officer, or

anyone connected with the support of your computer systems, at arms-length. Knowledge

management is a problem in human relations for which there may be a small, useful set of IT

tools. To turn knowledge management over to anyone connected with information

technology is to court disaster”. It is unsurprising that a lot of discussion about knowledge

management begins with careful (and lengthy) definitions, and often contains quite explicit

distancing from technology.

Alavi and Leidner (2001: 11) contend that the application of information technologies can

create an infrastructure and environment that contribute to organisational knowledge

management by “actualising, supporting, augmenting, and reinforcing knowledge processes at

a deep level through enhancing their underlying dynamics, scope, timing, and overall

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



38

synergy”. They assert that while IT is a key enabler, it's not a driver of knowledge

management. (Martiny, 1998; Seeley and Dietrick , 2000). Shereen Remez as the chief

knowledge officer of the General Services Administration contends, "technology is a useful

tool, necessary but not the driving force, whereas knowledge management is about people"

(Yu and Hartman, 2000:18).

While the preponderance of knowledge management theory stems from strategy and

organisational theory research, the majority of knowledge management initiatives involve at

least in part, if not to a significant degree, information technology. Reviewing the literature,

discussing applications of IT to organisational knowledge management initiatives, reveals

three common applications: (a) the coding and sharing of best practices, (b) the creation of

corporate knowledge directories, and (c) the creation of knowledge networks. Our analysis of

the literature suggests that IT can lead to a greater breadth and depth of knowledge creation,

storage, transfer, and application in organizations.

Advanced information technologies (e.g., the Internet, Intranets, Extra-nets, browsers, data

warehouses, data mining techniques, and software agents) can be used to systematize,

enhance, and expedite large-scale intra- and inter-firm knowledge management.

So, what is information management? Knowledge management enables individuals and

collaborative groups to identify, capture and share information, while information

management uses specialised IT staff to identify, capture and process information (Nonaka

and Takeuchi, 1995; Grover and Davenport, 2001). In very broad terms, information

management collects, processes and condenses information so you can manage it efficiently,

whereas knowledge management's objective moves in a quite different direction, enabling

information to be re-used and shared to allow the expansion of knowledge.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



39

INFORMATION MANAGEMENT KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

• Centres on recording and processing

information • Takes information from multiple sources and

organises into database system • Designed for centralised information storage

and control (empowers the IT function) • Emphasises enquiries to highly structured

repositories • Concerned with information collection,

classification and distribution • Dependent on well-defined enquiries for

retrieval • Required to maintain mission-critical,

enterprise data • Good productivity for efficiency

• Enables individuals and collaborative groups to

identify, capture and share information • Requires data to be put in context to generate

information • Information combined with experience creates

knowledge • Uses technology to share and leverage

information for innovation

Table 4: Distinction between Information Management and Knowledge Management

Knowledge management requires data to be put in context in order to generate information

which, when combined with experience, creates knowledge. To achieve this, it involves

combining the right technologies with an organisation's human resources, in terms of their

experience, expertise, acquired and accumulated knowledge.

Knowledge and information management use many of the same technologies. These include

electronic workplace technologies, such as groupware, information retrieval, data mining,

document management, email, push communication technology, Web browsers and Intranets.

Alignment of Knowledge Management with Business Strategy

Davenport (1999) asserts that knowledge management is not a program but a new way of

working that needs to be embedded into the overall strategy and organization design. The

importance of the relationship between knowledge management strategy and corporate

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



40

strategy must be emphasised. Ultimately, this means that the strategy team responsible for

knowledge management must answer the question: "Where can the application of knowledge

management result in the greatest value to the business?" Two leading indicators are: (a)

areas of strategic importance to the organization; and, (b) groups or "communities" that have

common objectives and/or information needs. The areas that are important to the

organization's strategic objectives become the areas that are important to the knowledge

management strategy.

Organisational Culture

How should an organisation deal with the cultural change that inevitably accompanies a

knowledge management effort? What impact does the organisational culture have on

knowledge management processes?

Schein (2000) has commented at length on this topic. There are distinctive life cycles for

businesses according to Ichak Adizes, and knowledge managers should take into account their

organization's age and position on the Adizes life cycle curve when deciding how to address

the culture. Schein (2000) suggests that the preoccupation with culture in knowledge

management may also detract from the reasons why KM is being done in the first place. By

dealing with cultural issues as just an item on the agenda, he feels that knowledge

management is attempting a difficult transformation. He suggests that managers should first

work out why they are doing KM. Schein asserts that the only way for a knowledge

management program to succeed is for it to be firmly linked to business objectives - and the

same has to be said for organisational culture.

Due to the Western companies lacking dynamism and competitiveness in the early 1980s,

management theorists questioned the scientific, quantitative approach to strategy making and

proposed humanistic approaches. Schein (1985: 9) defined culture as "a pattern of basic

assumptions - invented, discovered, or developed by a given group as it learns to cope with

problems of external adaptation and internal integration - that has worked well enough to be

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



41

considered valid and therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive,

think, and feel in relation to those problems." Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) agree with Schein

that culture is important for organisational knowledge creation.

If people share a common set of goals, a common perspective on what to do and how to

accomplish it, and a common vocabulary that allows them to coordinate their behaviour, then

command and hierarchical authority are of much less importance. People will be able to work

cooperatively without waiting for orders from the upper levels of the company. Managing

with a shared vision and with a strong organisational culture has been a very popular

prescription for organisations.

Communities of Practice

A community of practice is an organizational concept that is receiving much attention as a

mechanism for sharing and learning across the organisation, based on the common ground of

a professional discipline, a skill, a topic, a product category or a business process, and others

(McDermott, 1999).

Companies' informal organisations became a matter of practical urgency as well as academic

interest after 1987, when Etienne Wenger and Jean Lave of the Institute for Research on

Learning in Palo Alto identified these special groups. According to Stewart (2001: 107),

communities of practice are “groups that emerge around a discipline or problem - a work-

related subject like graphic design or the behaviour of derivative financial instruments. They

have no agenda; they are defined by the subject that engages them, not by project, rank,

department, or even corporate affiliation”.

Stewart (2001: 106) is confident that the concept of a community of practice has “assumed

what looks like a permanent, high place in management thinking. They are where learning

and innovation occur - the shop floor of human capital."

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



42

7 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR

The rate of innovation that is required to stay alive in modern organisations and societies is

outstripping the rate at which the command and control model can actually dream up ideas

and act on them. The least adaptive organisations are crumbling. The need for better KM

within the public sector is a central strategic commitment. Its successful implementation will

enable the government to work more efficiently, by more effective harnessing of its data,

information and experiences.

The government has a poor track record in knowledge management (Schmidt, 2001), for

historic reasons, and is particularly poor in leveraging tacit knowledge required to address the

challenges of its changing context. This is due to the structure, systems and ethos that has

characterised much government practice to date. At the same time, there is a growing

recognition that, in a changing public sector environment where governments have to address

a much more complex set of challenges in their external environment than before, and where

their financial resources are not growing at anything like the growth in demand for services,

learning and knowledge are possibly the most crucial variables in determining their ability to

address these challenges.

Firstly, the public sector has traditionally been strongly organised on bureaucratic principles

with very hierarchical structures and strong reliance on rules and procedures - "best practice"

in the 1920's in the early years of Taylorist organisation development. Secondly, it has been

organised on a strongly functional basis. This has resulted in much stronger, and more

enduring, functional silos than would have been the case in the private and non-governmental

sector.

From discussions with consultants working in the public sector, the authors' personal work

and consulting experience with the government at all three spheres, and Schmidt (2001), the

following conclusions could be drawn:

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



43

There is a very strong reliance, at a management level, on codified or explicit knowledge

and systems. Verification of actions is inevitably sought in legislation and rules, rather

than in the external impact of the action. This is reinforced, at present, by how the

government's transformation has been driven largely by legislation.

It follows that the tacit knowledge required for complex problem solving, strategic

management and effective leadership are highly undeveloped within the government. It

can make major strategic mistakes, but it will continue to be in business tomorrow. The

inherent incentive structures in the organisation, and the associated culture, have thus

tended to reward compliance at the expense of innovation and experimentation.

It follows further that the government has had, and continues to have, a very strong

internal, rather than external, focus which makes it very unresponsive to changes in both

its immediate, local, external environment, as well as changes and knowledge

developments in the global arena.

Knowledge and information tend to be stratified within the layers of the organisation, and

is not transmitted throughout the organisation. Senior managers thus have very little

access to important frontline knowledge, and the mass of employees has little sense of

what the government is trying to achieve. The flows of information and knowledge tend

to be exclusively top down (often in the form of directives), rather than bottom up or

horizontal.

Technical and professional knowledge tends to be very stratified within functional silos.

Very little cross-functional working and knowledge sharing within, and outside, the

government has taken place.

The knowledge base in the public sector is thus limited (because of its insular focus), largely

explicit and compartmentalised - within the functional hierarchies and within the different

strata of the organisation. The success of the government’s effort therefore became dependent

on a few key individuals since employees are disempowered.

The environment in which the provincial government operates is also significantly more

uncertain and competitive than it was in the past. Globally, and nationally, there are huge

pressures on them to modernise and to transform into an institution able to facilitate and drive

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



44

development in a knowledge economy. Knowledge management is a useful concept with

significant potential to help leverage change within the government. However, this will

necessarily be within a broader organisational change and organisational development

strategy.

There is a void of empirical studies that focus on managing knowledge in the public sector,

especially in South Africa. Since 1994, with the advent of the first democratic dispensation in

South Africa, both provincial and local governance institutions have experienced fundamental

restructuring. The focus thus far has centred on structural changes, with little understanding

of the intellectual capital in these institutions.

This study is of critical importance to both policy makers and practitioners in all spheres of

public sector governance. This research report will aim to assess the knowledge management

processes, and the key institutional issues, within the context of a provincial government

department. The results of our investigation will provide a lens through which a possible

framework for knowledge management would be designed for the DEAAT. This study could

be viewed as a pilot study for the PGWC. The scope of the research will be restricted to the

five Branches of the DEAAT: Business Promotion and Tourism, Agriculture, Transport,

Property Management and Works, and Corporate Affairs.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



45

8 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Objectives and Hypothesis

Knowledge management is the process by which the organisation generates wealth from its

intellectual and knowledge-based assets, i.e., embedded in people or derived from processes,

systems and its organisational culture. The Knowledge Tree Framework (Figure 4) depicts

how the organisation generates, maintains and deploys a strategically correct stock of its

knowledge to create value.

However, there are deeper reasons for why certain expert knowledge is not transferred.

Some of these obstacles are specific to South Africa, such as the “brain drain” and diversity

issues, but some are more general, such as re-engineering initiatives, where the more valued

staff (in terms of tacit knowledge) leaves the organisation voluntarily. Identifying and

removing these obstacles to knowledge transfer is an important part of successful knowledge

management.

The efficacy of the DEAAT in achieving its strategic objectives of becoming action-oriented,

client-driven, innovative, focused on service excellence, adopting international best practices,

promoting leadership and strategic partnerships, and utilising the best technology (DEAAT

Business Plan, 2001c), is directly dependent on its ability to harness its individual and

organisational knowledge.

The objectives of this research are as follows:

(i) To conduct a knowledge management survey within the DEAAT.

(ii) To identify the inhibitors to knowledge management.

(iii) To propose a knowledge management framework for DEAAT.

(iv) To recommend potential knowledge management initiatives.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



46

The hoped-for outcomes of this study are twofold:

(i) Acknowledgement that good knowledge management processes will enable the

DEAAT to achieve its strategic objectives.

(ii) That the recognition of the inhibitors to their knowledge management processes

will facilitate the achievement of its strategic objectives.

Research Instruments: Theoretical Underpinning

To gain an understanding of the conceptual models and theoretical constructs of knowledge

management, this study began with desktop research, i.e., a comprehensive review of

available literature, both from traditional and electronic sources. The major part of this study,

however, involved the collection of primary data (Refer to Figure 7).

Figure 7: Classification of Marketing Research Data Source: Wegner (2000)

RESEARCH DATA

Primary Data Secondary Data

Qualitative Data Quantitative Data

Descriptive Causal

Experimental Data Survey DataObservational Data

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



47

Secondary sources of data were not suitable for this study because the information was not

considered generalisable enough for application within the Provincial Government: Western

Cape Department of Economic Affairs Agriculture and Tourism.

The research methodology used in this study can be classified as partly qualitative (grounded

theory) and partly quantitative (descriptive) as it contains elements of exploratory and

conclusive research, generated by carrying out in-depth interviews and surveys.

The descriptive approach (as opposed to the causal approach) was preferred, as it would best

describe the behaviour of the system without attempting to influence or change the research

environment in which the research problem resides. Causal research requires an active

intervention by manipulating aspects of the system, to observe the effects of the changes

made (Huberman and Miles, 1994). This is normally carried out in a controlled environment

so that the cause-and-effect relationship can be identified. Casual research, in the context of a

knowledge management assessment, was unlikely to yield reliable results within the scope of

the research period. The descriptive design was open to the examination of statistical

associations and patterns between the system attributes.

The exploratory side of the research, namely, the in-depth interviews, was based in part on

grounded theory. What most differentiates grounded theory from much other research is that

it is explicitly emergent. It does not necessarily test a hypothesis. It sets out to find what

theory accounts for the research situation as it is. In this respect it is like action research: the

aim is to understand the research situation and to discover the theory implicit in the data. The

strength of this method is that the researcher can shift the focus of the study as the data is

collected, as it is quite common that the outcome will be unknown at the start, so the direction

may change in accordance with the kinds of information gathered (Huberman and Miles,

1994).

The general goal of grounded theory research is to construct theories in order to understand

phenomena, i.e., and the recurrent general features of the world that we seek to explain.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



48

A good grounded theory is one that is: (a) inductively derived from data, (b) subjected to

theoretical elaboration, and (c) judged adequate to its domain with respect to a number of

evaluative criteria (Mouton and Marais, 1991).

Qualitative methods involve exploration, the first step in inquiry. Quantitative methods

involve verification, the last step. Although preliminary exploration is usually necessary and

always helpful, exploration also requires verification. The weakness of verification alone is

that since experiments and other standardized formats (such as the scale and the standardized

interview) are narrow and rigid, one needs to have considerable knowledge before an

adequate testing procedure can be designed.

When combined with qualitative methods, part/whole morphology can be used to approach

seemingly intractable problems in the human world, generating comprehensive hypotheses to

the point that they might be tested. When combined with quantitative methods, the same two

steps can lead to the comprehensive testing of the hypotheses they generate.

Qualitative studies geared toward face validity only, neglect reliability. Face validity is

important; it means that an analysis of meaning can be related to ordinary language, a vast

repository for understanding the complexity and subtlety of human expressions. But ordinary

language is also a repository of bias, a bastion of the cultural status quo. Face validity alone

can never be a sufficient basis for determining meaning (Mouton and Marais, 1991).

Quantitative studies oriented toward reliability, neglect validity. Reliability is also of great

importance; it insures repeatability. But erroneous procedures can be repeated as easily as

correct ones. Reliability alone also cannot be a sufficient basis for determining meaning.

Both approaches are rational, but only in part. Reliance on face validity exemplifies

substantive rationality. This approach is sensitive to the particularities of situations, just as

procedural rationality is attuned to their general features (Huberman and Miles, 1994).

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



49

Data in grounded theory are idiosyncratic to particular investigative contexts. They are not as

stable and general as phenomena. Data are recordings or reports that are perceptually

accessible. Thus, they are observable and open to public inspection. Phenomena are not, in

general, observable. The importance of data lies in the fact that they serve as evidence for the

phenomena under investigation. In extracting phenomena from the data, we often engage in

data reduction using statistical methods. Generally speaking, statistical methods are of direct

help in the detection of phenomena, but not in the construction of explanatory theories.

(Mouton and Marais, 1991).

It is important to realise that reliability of data forms the basis for claiming that phenomena

exist. In establishing that data are reliable evidence for the existence of phenomena, we

control variously for confounding factors (experimentally and statistically). While reliability

is the basis for justifying claims about phenomena, we will see later that judgments about

explanatory coherence are the appropriate grounds for theory acceptance.

The notion of robustness, which has long been considered important in science, carries with it

the idea that there need to be multiple means for establishing the nature and existence of

phenomena. Strategies of multiple determinations are important because they are the major

means by which we establish the reliability needed to justify claims about phenomena.

Internal validity will naturally precedes external validity (or generalisability). The most

important threats to internal and external validity are: invalid constructs, inaccurate

measurements, unreliable data, invalid conclusions and non-representative sampling. Once

the results of the survey can be validated internally, it can be investigated in other provincial

or public sector institutions.

Sources Of Primary Data

Primary data was obtained from the management and staff of the various branches within the

DEAAT. The targeted profile were staff who had the responsibility of delivering the

objectives of the DEAAT, comprising staff from the Knowledge Economy and E-

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



50

government, Transport and Works, Business Promotion and Tourism, Corporate Affairs and

Agriculture branches. Although it was initially envisioned that all branches in the

department be interviewed, Agriculture Branches had to be excluded from the study due to

the time constraints to produce the report.

Exploratory research was first conducted only on the senior management to determine their

understanding of knowledge management, and how it is linked to their strategic objectives.

The remainder of the research is essentially descriptive (quantitative) and includes the

knowledge management assessment questionnaire (Appendix 4) that was based on a Likert

scale. The in-depth interviews (list of questions in Appendix 5) also served as the validation

of the findings.

Sampling Plan

Theoretical sampling is the process of collecting data for comparative analysis, and is

especially intended to facilitate the generation of theory. The emerging theory enables the

researcher to select comparison groups on the basis of their theoretical relevance. As we

conducted the interviews ourselves, we were, throughout the investigation, active samplers of

theoretically relevant data that identified the central variables of the emerging theory. The

senior management, with whom the in-depth interviews were held, were not exempt from

completing the questionnaire.

Sampling Method

Non-probability sampling was be used to select the candidates for the in-depth interviews

conducted on the senior management of the DEAAT (i.e., exploratory research), as no

statistical calculations on the data were envisaged. Sampling was therefore based on

judgment and convenience due the time constraints of the project. At least one senior

manager from each branch was interviewed.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



51

Probability sampling was used for the descriptive research (i.e., the knowledge management

questionnaire) because inferential statistical analysis was required. Proportionate stratified

random samples were taken (according to the respondent’s designation and branch within the

DEAAT) because a heterogeneous response profile was expected. The simple random

sampling was not chosen because it would assume a homogenous response and there was the

possibility that responses, pertinent to the study, would not have been obtained.

8.1.1 Sampling Unit Selection

The selection of proportionate sampling units was taken from the six branches within the

DEAAT, depending on their relative staff numbers and staff level. A number was assigned to

the individuals in each branch according to their respective staff level. For example, for the

Transport branch, a list of staff names and designations were obtained and the staff with

similar designations were grouped into four categories and then numbered as shown in Table

5.

Proportionate Stratified Random Sample Selection

Designation Deputy Director General; Directors

Assistant Director;Deputy Director

Senior Admin. or Technical

General Admin. or Other

Number of Staff

1. Mr A 2. Mr B

1. Mr A 2. Mrs B 3. Mr C

1. Mrs A 2. Mrs B

1. Mrs A 2. Mr B 3. Mr C

Table 5: The plan for the random selection of a stratified sample

Numbers were then chosen randomly from a box and were used to select staff to fill in the

questionnaire.

There was no rigorous way in which the required sample size could be calculated accurately,

mainly due to the uncertainty of the response rate. The sample size determination was

therefore a matter of judgment based on the time costs. A response rate of 10 - 30 % from

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



52

each branch was considered desirable, depending on the size and structure of the branch.

There is 2147 staff employed by the DEAAT (excluding vacant posts) as shown in Table 6.

Staff Numbers within the various Branches

Property Management &

Works

Business Promotion &

Tourism Agriculture Transport Corporate

Affairs

Knowledge Economy & e-govt.

TOTAL

280 25 700 1018 120 4 2147

Table 6: Staff numbers within the various branches

The Agriculture section was omitted from the quantitative study due to logistical reasons, and

was not considered as part of the population. The scope of the findings therefore covers the

five remaining branches of the DEAAT, with a population of 1447. For the quantitative

analysis, any reference to “DEAAT” would implicitly exclude of the Agriculture branch.

The job grades range between 1 and 16, with the more senior personnel having the higher

grades. Because of the diverse grading classification of staff designations, four categories

were broad enough to capture the appropriate staff, namely,

(i) Director General, Chief Directors and Directors;

(ii) Assistant and Deputy Directors;

(iii) Senior Technical and Senior Administrative; and

(iv) General Administrative and Other staff.

The first two categories were subsequently combined into one to represent senior

management.

On the question of generalisability (i.e., whether wider claims can be made on the basis of this

research) one recognises that there may be many sources of error (e.g., other departments

within the PAWC may produce varied outcomes), and this poses difficulty on the qualitative

research. Here, however, the samples chosen for the study were viewed to be

representative of the factors that may explain variations in the subject being studied.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



53

Data Collection

The three methods that were used for data collection included hardcopy questionnaires (for

the survey), tape recordings (for the interviews) and manual transcript (for the interviews).

The meetings were arranged at least one week in advance, and confirmed telephonically on

the day of the interview. All the meetings were conducted at the interviewee’s workplace.

The personal interview approach also allowed the researchers enough scope to sense the

cultural climate within the organization.

8.1.2 Questionnaire Design

A structured questionnaire (i.e., a fixed response format) was preferred over the unstructured

(or open-ended questionnaire), because it was considered simpler to structure the data for

analysis. The questionnaire was formatted in a disguised form (i.e., with no headings to

explain the purpose of the questions). This was preferred so that the respondent does not feel

pressured to give biased results. Refer to Appendix 4 for the full Questionnaire.

The front page of the questionnaire contained:

(i) A brief definition of Knowledge Management as described by Bukowitz and Williams

(1999) and Skyrme (1999).

(ii) The purpose of the questionnaire.

(iii) A note on the confidentiality of the information.

(iv) A brief explanation of how to fill in the questions.

The questionnaire was piloted among peers within other government departments to obtain

feedback on the relevance of the questions (length of time, degree of difficulty, etc.,) as well

as on possible amendments. It was found to be generally easy to fill in and took between 20

to 30 minutes on average to complete. A contact number was placed at the end of the

questionnaire in case of any difficulties.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



54

The 60 questions used in the survey were adapted from the knowledge management

diagnostic described by Bukowitz and Williams (1999). The questions were designed to

assess the various knowledge management processes as follows:

Questions 1 to 15 represent knowledge creation

Questions 16 to 30 represent sharing of knowledge

Questions 31 to 45 represent application of knowledge

Questions 46 to 60 represent retention of knowledge.

.

The Question Ratings convert to the Likert scores as follows:

ANSWER LIKERT SCORE INFERENCE

STRONGLY DISAGREE 1 1 Very low

DISAGREE 2

2 Low

SO-SO 3 3 Moderate

AGREE 4

4 High

STRONGLY AGREE 5

Average score per set of 15

questions

5 Very high

Table 7: The translation of the Likert scores to the rating of the KM processes

The printing of the questionnaires and distribution to the relevant selected staff were carried

out by the DEAAT.

Interview Protocol

The purpose of the interviews was to establish managements understanding of knowledge

management, whether they have already undertaken/or support the knowledge management

initiatives of the PGWC, whether they perceive knowledge management to be linked to the

broad strategic objectives of the department as stipulated in the DEAAT business plan.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



55

The objectives of the interview findings were as follows. Refer to Appendix 5 for the list of

interview questions and answers.

I. To assess the validity of our claims

II. To obtain a general overview of the current status of knowledge management in

the Department

III. To refine the design of the framework

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



56

Data Analysis

8.1.3 Data Preparation

The transcripts of the in-depth interviews were categorized into their respective branches and

profiled according to the answers given. The output of this exercise determined the current

senior management perceptions of knowledge management and highlighted the possible

barriers, Department strengths and weaknesses.

The first stage in the preparation of the questionnaire data, required capturing all the

information into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet format. This was accomplished by setting up a

database using Microsoft Access (computer software). Once set up, entering the data took on

average 2 to 3 minutes per questionnaire. A checklist of respondents was kept to verify that

the desired spectrum had been sampled. On completion of all the data checks and clean-up

procedures (e.g., deleting cases where there were no designation, years of service, etc.), the

data was transferred to STATISTICA (computer software) so that the necessary statistical

analyses could be processed conveniently.

8.1.4 Descriptive Statistical Methods

The percentage respondents and the sample percent per section were determined first. Each

of the sixty questions was simultaneously subjected to the basic descriptive statistics namely:

count, skewness, mean and standard deviation. The averages of questions 1 to 15; 16 to 30;

31 to 45 and 46 to 60 were calculated to represent the diagnosis of the knowledge

management processes: creation, sharing, application and retention, respectively. This

procedure was conducted on the entire sample, and then on the various branches individually.

The actual data and descriptive statistics are given in Appendix 6.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



57

8.1.5 Graphical Representations

Pie charts of the percentage respondents for the organization were constructed and broken

down by branch and staff level. From the questionnaire data, frequency distributions

represented by box-and whisker were constructed (See Appendix 7). The questionnaire data

analysis findings were represented on a web diagram.

8.1.6 Measures of Association

Factor analysis was used to find the latent variables amongst the observed data. It can also be

used to reduce the number of variables (factors) that can be used to explain the variance in the

larger set of variables. As part of the exploratory (grounded theory) research, factor analysis

was used to group the latent variables or characteristics that were used to identify the

particular theme to which the interviewees responded.

Factor analysis was also conducted on the subsets of variables (15 questions) that explain the

themes hidden in the questions for the “creation”, “sharing”, “application” and “retention” of

knowledge.

There are three stages in factor analysis, namely:

(i) Generation of a correlation matrix (i.e., a rectangular array of numbers which gives the

correlation coefficients between a single variable and every other variable in the

investigation)

(ii) the extraction of factors by observation of their Eigenvalues (the higher the Eigenvalue

the more significant the factor), and

(iii) rotation of the factors to maximise the relationship between the variables by

determining the absolute factor loadings. The higher the absolute factor loading the

more the factor contributes to the variable. The idea of rotation is to reduce the

number of factors on which the variables under investigation are heavily loaded. The

rotation does not really change anything but makes the interpretation easier.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



58

In this study, the Principal Factor Extractions were conducted and only those factors with

Eigenvalues greater than 1 were chosen. Varimax (Normalised) rotation was used to extract

the variables with factor loadings of greater than 0.70. However, lower Eigenvalues (but

close to 0.70) were also considered. A Scree plot (a graph of the Eigenvalues against all the

factors) was also generated. The graph can be useful for determining how many factors to

retain, but the selection can also be done automatically in STATISTICA. The point of

interest is where the graph starts to flatten.

The factors extracted from the data were then tabulated and various themes were associated

with the variables themselves. The average scores corresponding to the factors were then

determined. This exercise was repeated for the various branches, designations and periods of

service. The chi statistic was used to determine any associations between the responses and

the designation level and year of service.

The questionnaire data received were as follows:

Branch Number of Staff

Number of Questionnaires

Distributed

Number of Questionnaires

received

Response %

Sample Size %

Bus. Prom. & Tour. 25 23 12 52 48 Prop Mgt & Works 280 27 17 63 6

Corp. Affairs 120 17 17 100 14 Trans. & Infra. 1018 34 27 79 3

KEEG 4 4 1 25 25 TOTAL 1447 105 74 71 5

Table 8: The response to the survey questionnaire

The overall percentage response of 71% is considered good for this type of study particularly.

This may be due in part to the respondents being randomly selected (from the various staff list

provided) prior to distribution. The reason for the low distributions to the Transport &

Infrastructure and Property Management & Works branches is because the bulk of the staff is

off-site and not readily contactable. The spectrum of respondents is shown in Figure 8 and

Figure 9.

IGHT U

CT

The spectrum of respondents was considered representative of the knowledge base required

for the delivery of the DEAAT’s objectives, but as observed in Figure 9, the breakdown

heavily favoured the < 3 yrs category.

Figure 8: The profile percentages of the responses according to job designation

Fig

PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS ACCORDING TO DESIGNATION

Senior Management

22%

Senior Admin/ Technical

43%

General Admin/Other

35%

COPYR



59ure 9: The profile percentages of the responses according to years of service

PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS ACCORDING TO YEARS OF SERVICE

4-10 yrs7%

11-15 yrs22%

> 15 yrs13%

< 3 yrs58%

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



60

9 KEY FINDINGS

Although the frequency distributions of some of the data are not considered to be normal (see

Appendix 6), the numbers themselves are structured enough not to cause much interference

and outliers were not rejected (as per discussion with T. Wegner). Straight averages were

seen as representative of the findings. However, as a precautionary measure, the averages of

only the normally distributed data were also conducted, to determine any variation of the

findings. The box and whisker plots given in Appendix 7 give an indication of the variation

of the data. The range (maximum and minimum scores) for the questions is from 1 to 5

indicating diversity of opinions.

The overall knowledge management processes within the DEAAT are considered to be

moderate as each of the aspects, creation, sharing, application, and retention had average

scores of 3.

Figure 10: The Overall Results of the KM Processes for the DEAAT

The three branches: (i) Business Promotion and Tourism, (ii) Corporate Affairs and

(iii) Transport and infrastructure had similar diagnostic graphs to that of the overall DEAAT.

However, the Property Management and Works branch differed on the aspect of application

of knowledge, scoring 2 out of 5.

Knowledge Management Diagnostic

012345

Creation

Sharing

Application

Retention

DEAAT

The responses according to the Job Designation (three categories) and Years of Service (four

intervals) also showed similar results to those shown in Figure 10. It was earlier

hypothesised that there may be an association between the years of service because the

sample appears to be heavily skewed towards the group that had less than 3 years of service

with the DEAAT (equal 58% of respondents)

Statistical co

any associati

of service in

Factor Anal

The factor an

components

These 16 fac

plot (See Ap

were used fo

order of sign

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



61

Figure 11: The overall results of the KM processes according to years of service

and job designation

rrelations conducted on the variables show that there is no evidence to suggest

on between the knowledge management processes and job designation or length

the DEAAT at the 95% confidence level (See Appendix 10).

ysis

alysis on the questionnaire data (60 sixty variables) produced 16 Principal factor

(see Appendix 8 for their respective Eigenvalues and rotated factor loadings).

tors account for over 80 % of the variance in the data. Inspection of the Scree

pendix 9) shows that graph flattens out after factor 5, hence the first five factors

r further study. The Five most important themes that emerged in decreasing

ificance are as follows:


012345

Creation

Sharing

Application

Retention

Years of Service &

Designation

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



62

Factor Emergent Theme around the questions

F1 Organisational Culture: Openness, ideas valued, external work

setting

F2 Knowledge specialists, Updated repositories, People-focused

technology training

F3 Access to IT systems – connectivity, network people, facilitate

retention of knowledge

F4 Regarding people as assets rather than costs

F5 Mapping of Knowledge activities and assessment of knowledge

needs

Table 9: The five major factors extracted from the raw data.

The variables that constitute the most important factor (F1) are the KM process of

knowledge application.

The variables that comprise the second major factor (F2) are grouped within the set of

questions on knowledge creation.

Factor (F3) and (F4) are both grouped within the set of questions relating to the retention of

it knowledge. The questions that underpin (F4) are directly related to knowledge retention.

Factor (F5) lies in the set of questions that represent knowledge sharing.

The remaining factors isolated from the survey data are given in (Appendix 11).

Five Principal Factors were extracted from the data for the questions related to creation of

knowledge. The Factor Loadings (Eigenvalues) are provided in Appendix 12.


F1 Knowledge specialists, Updated repositories, People-focused

technology training

F2 Assessment of KM processes and assets

F3 Routine knowledge sharing of expertise

Figure 13: The theme for the factors are associated with knowledge creation

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



63

Three Principal Factors were extracted from the data for the questions related to sharing of


The importance factors decrease from F1 to F3


F1 Value non-work learning, Openness to learn

F2 Knowledge specialists and performance appraisal support sharing

F3 Group activities promoting sharing, Locating experts to share

Table 10: The theme for the factors is associated with knowledge sharing

Three Principal Factors were extracted from the data for the questions related to application of


The importance factors decrease from F1 to F3 Factor Emergent Theme around the questions

F1 Culture: Openness, ideas valued

F2 Value creativity, flexibility, feedback

F3 Flexible organisation and connected workspace

Figure 11: The theme for the factors is associated with knowledge application

Three Principal Factors were extracted from the data for the questions related to retention of

knowledge. The Factor Loadings (Eigenvalues) are provided in Appendix 15. The scores of

these variables were also computed (See Appendix 16).


F1 Codifying tacit knowledge, Learning partnerships with outside

organisations

F2 Access to IT systems – connectivity, network people, facilitate

retention of knowledge

F3 Focus on core competencies

Figure 12: The theme for the factors is associated with knowledge retention

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



64

Inhibitors To Knowledge Management

The following list was compiled from the interview responses of the top management. They

were clustered into themes, and are arranged in descending order of importance:

Organisational Structure Management Style

Bureaucratic structures and procedures

"Machine organisation" – no creativity, initiative

Functional/Departmental silos

Poor capabilities of workforce

Command and control

Departmentalism/competition

Lack of management support

Organisational Culture Change Management

Behavioural changes: mindset

Lack of sharing due to power and status

Changes in technology

Cultural resistance to e-government

Affirmative action

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



65

10 ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

In this section the key findings will be analysed and discussed. This is based on the findings

derived from personal interviews with thirteen (44%) of the senior managers, comprising of

Deputy Director-Generals, Chief Directors and Directors, and from the data analysis of the

Knowledge Management Diagnostic questionnaire (n = 74).

Conceptual Understanding of KM

Knowledge management is an emerging discipline with a growing body of literature over the

past decade. There exists a range of definitions of KM. The word knowledge itself is very

ambiguous, which is expected as the current thinking is informed by a rich and long tradition

of debate in Western epistemology dating back to Plato and Aristotle.

The thirteen senior managers interviewed in the DEAAT reflect a diverse conceptual

understanding of knowledge and KM. Half of the managers interviewed defined KM as

"inherent in our line functions, processes, structures, business processes, and existing in

policies", and is "not necessarily a separate management issue" (Appendix 5).

Two managers described KM as systematic and explicit. A Deputy Director-General

contended, "knowledge management is building a systematic, reliable, qualitative, intuitive,

evaluative, and iterative system for decision-making"(Appendix 5). While another Deputy

Director-General expressed scepticism of KM as the latest fad. A quarter of the managers

identified KM processes of acquiring, transferring, retrieving, and application of knowledge

as central to KM.

The differing elements of the manager's understanding of KM are to be found in the current

literature on KM. Earl (2001: 215) states "knowledge management, like knowledge itself, is

difficult to define". His proposed taxonomy comprising seven schools of KM suggests that

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



66

KM can be defined in different ways. Myers (in Beckman, 1999:1-3) defines organisational

knowledge "as knowledge captured by the organisation's systems, processes, products, rules,

and culture". Beckman's (1999: 1-6) survey of the existing literature in KM indicates that

most authors define KM as "systematic", "explicit", and "deliberate" to "achieve the

organisation's objectives", "create value", " produce the biggest payoff or return", and "make

the best decision", through the processes of "acquiring, creating, organising, transferring,

using and storage."

The major implication of the various conceptions of knowledge is that each perspective

suggests a different strategy for managing organisational knowledge, and a different

perspective of the role of people and systems in support of knowledge management.

It is evident that there is no common, explicit or accepted description of knowledge or KM in

the Department. As the driving force to become a knowledge-centric organisation and the

champion of e-government, DEAAT needs to develop a shared and explicit definition of KM.

This would provide the Department's managers and members with a clear understanding of

the conceptual nature of knowledge and its management, and the collective direction for

future KM initiatives.

Alignment of Knowledge Management with Business Strategy

All the managers interviewed agreed that the Departmental strategic objectives are not linked

to any knowledge management objectives, but are implicit in their strategic objectives. There

is no formal or explicit KM policies, goals, and strategies. A Director confirmed, "knowledge

objectives do not appear in our strategic objectives. It is neither part of human resources

management nor information management (Appendix 5).

However, there is a broad recognition amongst the top management that the alignment of

business strategies with KM objectives is essential in fulfilling the Department's strategic

objectives. This is reflected in a Director's statement: "there is a definite belief that

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



67

knowledge management would facilitate the achievement of the Branch’s strategic

objectives". A Chief Director affirmed: "the Department cannot perform without tapping

into knowledge via experience and intellect. Therefore, enhancement of knowledge

management will enable the achievement of the Branch’s strategic objectives" (Appendix 5).

.

Knowledge is becoming more important as a corporate currency as we soar into the

knowledge era, and top management is forced to make explicit, and communicate clearly and

concisely its knowledge management strategies. Knowledge management is not a

programme, but a new way of working that needs to be embedded into the overall strategy

and organisational design. Davenport (1999: 2-1) concludes that "if a concept such as

knowledge management is to have a broad impact, it must be integrated with the firm's

existing strategic direction or propel it into a new one. Knowledge management must affect

the most important areas of the business, improve the firm's most critical objectives, and be

viewed as an integral part of strategic business initiatives."

He further points out that few companies have had an explicit KM strategy; and that they have

proceeded opportunistically, and middle-level managers have attempted to manage whatever

knowledge was under their own control. However, a few organisations, from Warner-

Lambert to Hewlett-Packard to the United States government, that initiated KM initiatives in

the 1990s, expound the importance of the relationship between knowledge management

strategy and corporate strategy (Martiny, 1998; Seeley and Dietrick, 2000; Yu and Hartman,

2000). It was through such integration of KM that the ongoing strategic objectives, core

competencies, and employee capabilities were transformed, and the performance of these

organisations improved in a noticeable way.

The mission of the DEAAT, presented in its Business Plan 2001-2002, is "the active

promotion of an environment conducive to rapid and sustainable economic growth which will

result in a world-class economy…" (DEAAT, 2001: 9). Most of the strategic objectives of

the Department focus on enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of its service delivery to

citizens. An expected key result "is the development and implementation of Cape Gateway

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



68

and a Cape Online strategy"(DEAAT, 2001: 10). The nature of these objectives is

knowledge-centred, i.e., they will require the investment of intellectual assets for its

realisation. If knowledge is crucial to its strategy, then several questions arise from the

perspective of KM that require answers from the senior managers:

What knowledge do we need to carry out these strategy execution activities?

Which aspects of our knowledge environment should we be assessing?

Which knowledge domain (clients, services, products, partners, or others) is most

important to the Department?

Which type of knowledge is more important to manage: tacit or explicit?

KM Processes in the DEAAT

The interviews, to a limited extent, and the questionnaire explored the KM processes of

sharing, creation, retention, and application in the DEAAT. The Department has neither

systematically nor formally assessed its existing knowledge or its KM processes. A skills

audit was undertaken in 2000, although the managers are unaware of the outcome of this

audit.

Knowledge Sharing

Half of the managers interviewed, indicated that the sharing of knowledge was a major

weakness in the Department. This represented the views of all managers in the Business

Promotion and Tourism Branch, and fifty percent of those from Transport, and Property

Management and Works Branches. The Corporate Affairs' managers considered the sharing

of knowledge as their Branch strength. A Director observed that "some employees feel

intimidated if they share too much of their knowledge, they say that they will eventually lose

power and status and will no longer be needed for their knowledge. There is a culture

whereby one uses their own knowledge for their own purposes only" (Appendix 5).

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



69

The tradition of "turf protection", "departmentalism", and "cautiousness" with regard to

information and knowledge, and the "withholding of knowledge, especially in the areas

outside one's own knowledge base" (Appendix 5) characterises an organisational culture of

hoarding

The overall moderate level of knowledge sharing (Figure 10) indicates its middle-of-the-road

position within the Department. This is not an optimal state for an administration that is

pursuing electronic government strategies in the knowledge economy. Guidance on focus

areas for this KM process can be gained from the principal factor on knowledge sharing, viz.,

openness to new learning, and valuing non-work learning. These underscore the need for

creating flexible, non-hierarchical work environments that promote learning; valuing

informal, and experiential cognitive processes. The factor analysis also places emphasis on

the essential role of knowledge specialists, such as chief knowledge officers, or their

equivalents, and knowledge managers, in the knowledge sharing process.

Dr. Shereen Remez, chief knowledge officer of the General Services Administration (GSA) in

the United States government confirms the situation in the DEAAT as typical for the public

sector: "We are brought up in a competitive world. People say, 'If I tell my secrets I won't be

an expert anymore; they will all know what I know and I won't be valued as much'"(Yu and

Hartman, 2000: 18).

Organisational success is inextricably tied to the ability to share and leverage knowledge in

order to provide predictable high quality service delivery to clients. Knowledge management

begins with processes to share and create knowledge and is sustained by a knowledge-friendly

culture.

How does an organisation improve its ability to share? Here are some innovative examples:

The USA Navy presented its first Knowledge Sharing Award recognising outstanding

cross-organisational knowledge sharing and innovative knowledge sharing (Bennet,

2000).

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



70

The GSA has developed reward systems so that people will be recognized for sharing best

practices, e.g., a best practices sharing pilot in the GSA's Public Building Service (Yu and

Hartman, 2000).

Sharing by putting information on the Web site or database, or attending a workshop to

share best practice is becoming common practice.

Grover and Davenport (2001) have pointed out that one of the most common objectives in

KM projects involves implementing some sort of knowledge repository, to capture

knowledge for later and broader access by others within the organisation.

A community of practice is an organisational concept that is receiving much attention as a

mechanism for sharing and learning across the organisation (McDermott, 1999; Burk,

2000; Stewart, 2001). It is based on the common ground of a professional discipline, a

skill, a topic, a product category or a business process, and others. Creative communities

such as incubators and innovation circles are becoming vogue in new product

development. The University of Cape Town Centre for Innovation & Entrepreneurship,

based at the Graduate School of Business, has created novel initiatives, such as the

International Venturing Laboratory (IV Lab), that function as a COP.

Knowledge Creation

The managers in all the Branches, except Business Promotion and Tourism regarded

knowledge creation as a major problem within their Branches. Some managers highlighted

two constraints to knowledge creation: time and operating in a crisis management mode.

"There is no time to even record basic data or for research or collection of statistics in

acquiring new knowledge. We are reacting to crises and get a little input, with no active

process to acquire better solutions", commented a Director. His colleague noted that

"knowledge creation is not proactive in identifying knowledge needs and we have not

dedicated staff to it"

A skills audit questionnaire was distributed to all employees in early 2000 to obtain

information on their personal details and skills sets. The Chief Personnel Officer regards the

requisite capabilities in their job descriptions as the knowledge that is needed to achieve their

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



71

objectives. By August 2001, fifty percent of the questionnaires were returned, and currently a

quarter is outstanding. A gap analysis of the requisite skills and the available skills will be

completed by January 2002, to meet the statutory requirements of the Workplace Skills Plan.

The top management indicated that they acquired knowledge through meetings, direct

sharing, professional bodies, "communities of practice", international seminars, associations,

Internet, Intranet, reports, Universities, training, continuous education, working groups and

literature.

The diagnostic reveals that there is a moderate level of knowledge creation in all the Branches

(Figure 10). The first principal factor for knowledge creation - the need for knowledge

specialists - underline the challenge to appoint senior people for managing the knowledge

creation process.

Having knowledge repositories that are relevant and current also features on top of the list of

factors. Together with appropriate IT application training (another top factor), which

enhances the capabilities and the connectivity of members, the content of these repositories

should be the product of knowledge conversion from tacit to explicit or externalisation, to use

Nonaka's (1994) language. This reinforces the paradigm that KM is about people, and the

need to value the organisation's intellectual resources, while promoting greater social

interactions through collaborative business processes, and enabling technology, that

encourage sharing.

The assessment of KM processes and knowledge assets, high up in the principal factor list,

highlights the significance of organisational knowledge self-evaluation. Having insights into

the Department's intellectual resources, together with the processes that acquire, create,

transfer, use and stores knowledge, must form part of the strategy formulation process of the

organisation.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



72

Knowledge Retention

The managers interpreted the retention of knowledge as the storage of information, and the

loss of human resources. It is evident from the managers' responses that the Department's

intellectual capital and specialised knowledge is compromised when employees leave the

Department. "The political transition saw many experienced personnel leave and this exodus

had a detrimental effect on the Department", recalled a Director. And a Chief Director

concurs that "when knowledgeable people leave the Branch there is an anticipated drop in the

level of service delivery or strategic objectives". Another senior manager observed, "when

people leave they leave with their knowledge. This creates a huge vacuum, as new people

take a long time to get knowledge, as government-specific knowledge is required"

(Appendix 5).

Knowledge storage is mostly paper-based with tomes of documents and files a typical feature

in government offices. The content of these documents comprises management decisions,

policies, and project reports. A Deputy Director-General noted that the information contained

in these documents may not be easily communicated to all staff members and that the Branch

has no documented best practices. There is no documentation of lessons learnt from the

hundreds of projects undertaken or from the wide range of services delivered. Only two

managers interviewed have recorded limited number of best practices. Best practice creation

is vital for retaining and sharing the learning from the different Branches. A Chief Director

disapproved of the volume of paper documents, in the form of legislation and policies, that

land on his desk, as they were difficult to comprehend and required many hours to peruse.

"The retention of knowledge is a problem. Without proper retention one cannot share

knowledge". "The document tracking system is not functional. There are eight databases in

this Provincial Government and they don't talk to each other". These remarks, from top

management, draws attention to the principal factors of knowledge retention in the DEAAT -

codifying tacit knowledge, access to IT systems and connectivity, and facilitating the

retention of knowledge. The latter requires access to tools to store knowledge, and

knowledge repositories, i.e., systems to facilitate storage and retrieval of knowledge. The

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



73

diagnostic reveals that there is a moderate level of knowledge retention in all the Branches

(Appendix 5).

Knowledge Application

In general, the mangers responded positively to the level of knowledge application in the

Department. A Transport Director was upbeat about this KM process: "The use and

application of knowledge are the Branch's strong points." A large part of the application is in

the form of directives, i.e., standard operating procedures (SOPs), rules and instructions.

"There are operating procedures in place that help minimise the reliance on tacit knowledge",

commented a Director. The second form of knowledge application is through organisational

routines that are mainly professional, i.e., by engineers, architects, economists, agronomists,

and human resources and financial professionals. The third way is through self-contained

task teams that are set up for a specific assignment on a needs basis.

The diagnostic reveals that there is a moderate level of knowledge application in all the

Branches, except Property Management and Works, which scored low (Appendix 5). This

knowledge process factor analysis revealed that an organisational culture that is characterised

by openness, creativity, flexibility, feedback, and that values members' ideas, is necessary for

the effective application of knowledge.

A crucial area for attention is to create flexible and connected workspaces that supports access

to information for the workforce. This demands the mental liberation from the oppressive silo

mentality of functional and hierarchical barriers, not to mention the redesign of the physical

workplace, and the integration of the current databases to create a single KM portal. To make

good management-decisions, people need access to the whole organisation, and not only

restricted to information in their line departments. The Department needs to become a

learning environment, encouraging people to value and increase the knowledge they have.

Thus, additional educational opportunities and interactive, social ways of leveraging tacit

knowledge should be promoted.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



74

Information and Communications Technology

There is a wide range of supporting technologies available in the Department to support the

knowledge management processes, namely, personal computers, the Internet, databases, and

the Intranet. Under half of the senior managers assessed their Intranet (GroupWise) as

effective, and two thirds said that the Intranet was used daily by their staff as an email service.

A manager indicated that e-mail is a convenient mechanism of exchange of information, but

some still do not acknowledge e-mail messages as being official. The IT support to users in

the Department is uneven.

A manager said: "Strategic objectives are not necessarily aligned with the knowledge

management processes in that databases are not shared among departments…each has its own

separate system". A Deputy Director-General is confident that technology will assist in

making knowledge accessible as "in government we have a lot of information locked in files -

paper-based and not accessible, though the right people should have access".

The five Branches of the Department are part of the PGWC web site:

www.westerncape.gov.za. A search done on this web site's directory for the key words

"knowledge management" resulted in zero matches. A message posted on the "Contact Us"

page requesting documentation on knowledge management in the provincial government,

over six weeks ago, has not elicited any reply. Though you are promised "We will make sure

that your message gets to the right people" (http://www.westerncape.gov.za/contacts.asp,

2001).

In realising the provincial policy on the knowledge economy, the DEAAT is currently

establishing its e-government structure, Cape Gateway. At present, there are no online

electronic services available from the provincial government. A consultation process with the

other Departments is underway for feedback on a portal template. Prior to this there were

presentations to all the Departments outlining the Cape Online Strategy.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



75

The organisation's attempts to transform itself into a customer-driven e-government leader in

South Africa are in its embryonic stage. The views expressed by some of the managers

interviewed reveal that better consultation and communication is necessary to enable the

managers and the workforce to engage practically with e-government. A Director surmised:

"I know they are setting up web pages … they do not affect my work … most people don't

know who they (Cape Gateway) are". While other senior managers who recognise the

benefits of e-government, and consider it a good concept, are apprehensive about its

implementation. As a Director points out: "We need a mind-shift from serving the needs of

the Department to serving the needs of the client. Province is not ready at a management

level … the hierarchy is a limiting factor, a user-based approach will not be accepted by

management. The structure of the Department shows a control mindset. The pilot study on

motor vehicle registration is a far cry from doing things electronically."

The success of the e-government initiative will depend on the re-engineering of business

processes, electronic information documentation, networked databases, identifying the

relevant expertise, and the integrity of the current IT systems. These elements do form part of

the Cape Online Strategy, however, Cape Gateway has focused its attention on establishing

the IT architecture for e-government.

The contemporary literature on KM cautions organisations focusing mainly on the delivery of

technological solutions as they are bound to be less than successful (Seeley and Dietrick,

2000; Yu and Hartman, 2000; Grover and Davenport, 2001). Organisational and people

issues which are not readily solved by IT systems would need to be resolved. There is a

widespread concern that governments are concentrating too much on the visible use of

information technology for electronic service delivery to citizens, and on the benefits of e-

commerce, while neglecting internal information exchange, in and, between Departments,

agencies and other local stakeholders (Harvard Policy Group, 2001). "Technology is a useful

tool, necessary but not the driving force, whereas knowledge management is about people"

(Remez in Yu and Hartman, 2000).

.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



76

Approaches to KM should be primarily about creating the right environments, opportunities

and motivation for people to meet or talk and transfer knowledge in context. It is very

important to distinguish this from information management and retrieval systems.

By organising and developing employee skills, talents and expertise KM emphasises the

human mind, which is still the best way to solve a customer's problem. Contextual issues

such as organisational cultural change that inevitably accompanies a KM effort is relegated to

the bottom of the KM agenda. At Hewlett-Packard, obtaining results depended on energizing

the organization toward achieving the desired behaviours through committed leadership,

purposeful processes, easy access to knowledge and an open and trusting culture (Martiny,

1998).

Inter- and Intra- Departmental Information Flows

Half of the managers did not know what projects were in progress in the other Branches of the

Department. The internal experts were known to only a third of the managers. Most of the

managers characterised the information flows within the Department, and between the

Departments, as weak and in need of improvement. The management forum meetings were

regarded as useful for feedback on projects. A Director remarked that: "we need to change

the internal communications such as the route forms. The one half does not know what the

other half is doing. So you will have problems with a call centre as the referral system will

not work".

These sentiments underscore the information flows in the DEAAT: "senior managers know

the projects in the other branches but they should improve the transfer of this information

down the hierarchy". "Inter-departmental co-operation is a weak point. There is a major lack

of communication between certain branches and this is an area for improvement". "The

transfer of knowledge is inhibited by the bureaucratic structure of the organisation.

Communication lines are poorly designed and the messages cannot be effectively

communicated because of ‘red-tape’ issues".

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



77

There has to be a carefully considered review of the information assets and flows within the

Department. This will require time, effort, skill, and the commitment, support and

understanding of senior managers. The poor state of information flows could have major

implications on the success of any future KM initiatives and e-government.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



78

11 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK FOR THE DEAAT

In the absence of dedicated KM strategies, the DEAAT does not benefit from harnessing their

knowledge, as they should. "A framework for knowledge management is needed", alluded a

Director.

The factor analysis indicates that the key principal factors can be divided twofold into: social

and cultural, i.e., valuing diversity of ideas, interpersonal relationships, teamwork, the

importance of tacit knowledge, and the ability to manage change; and, structural and systemic

– bureaucracy, organisational flexibility, information systems management, repositories of

knowledge. These factors should inform the choice of appropriate KM initiatives that will

support the organisation. Top management must respond to the organisational and

behavioural challenges of KM in the Department.

The aim of this framework is to explicate a cohesive understanding of knowledge and

knowledge management within the DEAAT that will form the conceptual and theoretical

foundation for the development and implementation of KM strategies. There are five stages

in the framework (Figure 12): (a) defining KM, (b) knowledge self-evaluation, (c) developing

knowledge goals, (d) choosing KM initiatives, and (e) implementation of KM solutions. The

framework is eclectic in design and content, drawing from a wealth of case studies of KM

initiatives in the public and private sectors, and academic writings.

Drawing from other KM initiatives, such as the GSA, it would be advisable for the

Department to identify KM pilots that are critical to its strategic objectives and manageable.

Creating Awareness

Introducing a knowledge management initiative requires change management. The intentions

and objectives of knowledge management should be communicated to the organisation and

staff should be allowed to participate in building the strategy for a KM initiative.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

KN

OW

LED

GE

MA

NA

GEM

ENT

GO

ALS

defin

ition

of

know

ledg

e

man

agem

ent

orga

nisa

tiona

l kn

owle

dge

self-

eval

uatio

n

Fig

ure

12: P

ropo

sed

Kno

wle

dge

Man

agem

ent F

ram

ewor

k fo

r the

DEA

AT

C

O

N S C I O

U S N

E S C

O

L

L

A

B

O

R

A

T I O

N

C

O

N

N

E

C

T I V I T

Y

CR

EA

TIO

N

OF

KN

OW

LE

DG

E

MA

NA

GE

ME

NT

A

WA

RE

NE

SS

TA

CIT

K

NO

WL

ED

GE

D

IME

NSI

ON

S O

C I A

L T

E

C

H

N

O

L

O

G

Y C

U

L

T

U

R

E

EX

PLIC

IT

KN

OW

LE

DG

E

DIM

EN

SIO

N

dive

rsity

of

idea

sdi

alog

ue

E- d

irect

ory

men

tal m

odel

s

refle

ctio

n

co-o

pera

tion

inte

rper

sona

l re

latio

nshi

ps

tole

ranc

e of

err

ors

men

tors

hip

mut

ual

lear

ning

Pers

onal

H

ome

Page

Kno

wle

dge

Rep

osito

ries

Kno

wle

dge

Asse

ts

self-

orga

nisa

tion

acce

ptan

ce o

f ch

ange

CO

MM

UN

ITIE

S O

F PR

AC

TIC

E

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Gain participation in building the process for implementing KM initiatives, including –

who will be the champion (individual and/or department), what knowledge should be

mapped, how knowledge will be accessed, how it will be distributed, how it will be

developed, how reward and recognition systems should be implemented, etc.

Communicate development of the initiative as broadly and as frequently as possible.

Ensure that the appropriate training occurs.

Definition of knowledge and KM

As the driving force to become a knowledge-centric organisation and the champion of e-

government, DEAAT needs to develop a shared and explicit definition of knowledge and

KM. This would provide the Department's managers and employees with a clear

understanding of the conceptual nature of knowledge and its management, and the collective

direction for future KM initiatives.

Organisational Knowledge self-evaluation

This research report attempted to assess the top management's views on a variety of KM

issues, and the current state of KM processes within the DEAAT. The first step in

implementing a KM solution is self-evaluation. The organisation needs to look at how you

are handling knowledge at all levels. This will indicate the knowledge culture and the status

of KM within the organisation.

What kind of sharing is being done successfully?

How accessible and relevant is the database?

Are there communities of practice in the organisation?

Are people sharing war stories or, information about their expertise?

Is tacit knowledge or explicit knowledge more important to manage?

What are the potential barriers for the KM processes?

For the strategy team to be effective during the strategic planning process, it will require a

good understanding of what knowledge exists and what knowledge is still required. KM

needs a closer tie to business strategy, and vice versa. The skills audit undertaken by the

organisation has severe limitations as an instrument for this purpose. Besides the relevance

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



81

the information, collected over a period of two years, its objectives and methodology are not

aligned to the strategy formulation process. The organisation must also have awareness of the

capabilities of each person, and the ability to connect human resource investments to desired

skills and resources.

For a conscious process-oriented approach to KM, the organisation needs to consider the

appointment of a chief knowledge officer, or an equivalent, and knowledge managers. The

CKO should be a member of the top management team. This will signal to employees that

knowledge is a crucial organisational resource, and that the Department views knowledge and

its management as critical to its success. The role of the CKO is significant for both

operational and symbolic reasons. The CKO will be responsible for the self-evaluation stage,

the design of the knowledge architecture, and championing the implementation of the KM

strategies. Government, like many other organisations, face a huge backlog in building

professional capabilities such as knowledge management specialists.

There are a variety of tools that can be utilised for this stage, such as the Knowledge

Management Diagnostic (Bukowitz and Williams, 1999), and Arthur Andersen's Knowledge

Management Assessment Tool. The organisation could also adapt existing tools or use a

refined version of the diagnostic questionnaire used for this research report (focusing on the

primary factors generated by the factor analysis).

Defining knowledge goals

Defining knowledge goals is the starting point of KM. Knowledge goals can only be fully

effective if they are embedded in the organisation context. Knowledge goals exist at three

levels: (a) normative, (b) strategic, and, (c) operational (Probst, Raub, and Romhardt, (1998).

These three levels should, ideally, complement each other, jointly contributing to the

achievement of company goals.

Normative knowledge goals pertain to the general vision of organisation policy and all aspects

of culture. These goals should achieve the following:

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



82

Knowledge–aware or knowledge-friendly organisational culture.

Conditions for knowledge–oriented strategic and operational goals.

A culture in which knowledge is valued as a resource.

A common language is built and understood.

An environment that fosters collaboration, knowledge sharing, continual learning and

improvement.

Leadership, commitment and conviction from top management through overt support

of, and engagement with, the value of knowledge to the organisation.

A culture of trust in which mistakes is tolerated, thus encouraging a spirit of

innovation and openness among employees.

Build systems that recognise and reward appropriately (e.g., performance management

systems, incentives, awards, profiling of achievements). These must be linked to

knowledge goals, and to behaviours that promote the creation, sharing and retention of

knowledge.

The successful implementation of KM at the strategic and operational levels is dependent on

actualising the above.

Strategic knowledge goals are then set for strategic programme aimed at realising the vision.

These goals should:

Identify the kinds of expertise that will be needed in the future. This will assist in

sustaining the organisation's knowledge assets, especially in times of rationalisation or

downsizing.

Establish the organisations core competencies and capabilities. They should

emphasise which competencies should be developed, preserved, and which are

obsolete.

Operational knowledge goals help to ensure that programmes are implemented through daily

activities. Operational goals should:

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



83

Translate normative and strategic goals into concrete, practicable objectives.

Ensure that KM is implemented at the operational level.

Invest and optimise the infrastructure for KM.

Choosing Knowledge Management Initiatives

The corporate strategy team must identify the requisite knowledge goals, objectives, and

resources, and the KM processes that will result in the greatest value to the organisation. The

areas such as business processes, functions, product or service categories that are important to

the organisation's strategic objectives become the areas that are important to the KM strategy.

Based on the results from this research, KM initiatives that both collect information and

connect people are proposed.

Connect KM Processes and Systems

Communities of Practice

"Tacit knowledge is the real gold in knowledge management and communities of practice are

the key to unlocking this hidden treasure," says Richard McDermott (2000). Knowledge

communities or community of practice, developed in the organisational learning movement,

suggest that knowledge flows best through informal networks of people who form to advance

a discipline or practice specialty, or have common interests or problems. These communities

are designed and maintained for an organisational purpose and they can be inter- or intra-

organisational. Botkin and Seeley (2001) believe strongly that communities of practice are a

key element in a holistic approach to KM.

The essential attribute of communities is that they exchange and share knowledge

interactively, often in non-routine, personal, and unstructured ways, as an interdependent

network (Earl, 2001; Grover and Davenport, 2001). An important feature of these

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



84

communities is that they bring together knowledge and knowers. Communities of practice are

one of the most effective means of delivering tacit knowledge to the point of need. Tacit

knowledge is only really accessible in social interactions between people through a process

Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) call socialisation. Researchers have estimated that only 20

percent of knowledge in an organisation is ever captured and made explicit; that leaves 80

percent in the minds of organisational members (Botkin and Seeley, 2001).

A valuable KM initiative for the PGWC would be to support the building of communities of

practice across departments. The DEAAT , by incorporating these communities will add

value to the organisation, while enriching community members and increasing the potential of

its knowledge resources. Attention should be given to four challenges in developing

communities of practice (McDermott, 2000; Botkin and Seeley, 2001):

(a) Management challenge:

To communicate to staff that the organisation and management sincerely values

sharing.

Form communities around topics at the heart of the business where leveraging

knowledge will have a significant impact.

Encouragement and time for staff to participate; make participation part of people's

jobs.

(b) Community challenge

To create real value for community members.

Involve thought leaders who are well-connected key players with specialised

knowledge.

Maintain personal contact amongst members.

(c) Technical challenge

Design the social side of collaborative technology.

Easy access to connect and contribute to the community.

Use software that integrates with people's daily work.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



85

(d) Personal challenge

Openness to new ideas and maintaining a desire for developing the community's

practice.

Thinking together to solve problems through brainstorming and sharing half-baked

ideas.

A recommended reference for more details on management's role, the community life cycle,

roles for community start-up and operation, is Botkin and Seeley's (2001) paper titled "The

Knowledge Management Manifesto." Useful tools that facilitate community life can be

accessed from the following web sites: CommuniSpace (www.communispace.com), and

eRoom (www.eroom.com).

Electronic Directory

"We need to make our expertise available to everyone in the organisation," says Andy

Michuda, CEO of Teltech (in Bukowitz and Williams, 1999: 46). It is a goal on many

executive wish lists these days. One of the most straightforward ways to accomplish this is to

create an electronic directory or Yellow Pages that direct members of the organisation to

people who can help them with specific problems or issues. It lists members of an

organisation with their education and business backgrounds that can be sorted by areas of

expertise. Often they are compiled from the HR department records, and are usually available

via the organisation's intranet. KM consultant Carol Gorelick states: "This is a simple first

step in sharing individual expertise across an organisation,"(Gorelick and Crawford, 2001: 2).

This system facilitates contact and knowledge transfer between people with expertise and

those who seek their knowledge.

Creating a Personal Intranet Home Page

Personal Intranet home pages allow individuals, on a voluntary basis, to list their own

background, experiences and interests. Personal pages usually have an e-mail link to the

http://www.communispace.com/

http://www.eroom.com/

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



86

individual and allow links to his or her work product or service. It allows the right people to

connect with each other to help solve unique problems. Because each individual creates

them, they often uncover unexpected expertise. Members of the organisation do not require

any technical expertise to complete a personal page. These home pages can then be searched

in a variety of ways - both structured and unstructured, and can be linked to other web content

in the usual way.

For a knowledge management system to be successful, ownership needs to reside with the

individuals concerned. This is their personal alternative prospectus - how they want to be

known rather than how the organisation knows them. As such, it complements existing

people systems rather than replaces them. It helps build a living, breathing three-dimensional

representation of a person - far broader than a set of work histories or training records.

The transfer of knowledge is all about people and relationships rather than projects and

resources - hence an environment to support knowledge management needs to respect people

and provide ways for them to key into relationships with others. This will foster the principal

factors, derived from this research, of building interpersonal relationships and valuing the

diversity of ideas.

Collect KM Processes and Systems

Knowledge Repositories

Due to the sheer volume of documents and the necessity to keep records accessible over a

long period of time, the challenges for government's application of KM systems are workflow

and collaborative computing. Workflow is essential for the expedient routing of documents

and collaborative computing is necessary for various people sharing these documents.

Increasingly government agencies are investing in sophisticated documentation management

systems, as case studies in government agencies in the USA and the Netherlands,

(Zimmermann, 1999) illustrate that improving documentation management can improve KM.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



87

The Department should be looking to streamline and speed its workflow and collaborative

computing capabilities, processes and systems in the advent of its e-government thrust. There

is urgency for the DEAAT to integrate its legacy database systems. This must take

cognisance of the Cape Online objective of electronic service delivery, based on "life events"

rather than functional or Departmental service delivery.

In many organisations, one of the most common KM initiatives is to implement some form of

knowledge repository. The objective is to capture knowledge for later and broader access by

others within the organisation. Common repository technologies, in the form of relational

databases, include Domino, SQL, Oracle, and Informix, and transfer tools such as Lotus

Notes, Web-based Intranets, and Microsoft Exchanges, supplemented by search engines,

document management tools, and other tools, allow for editing and access.

The repository should contain a specific type of knowledge for a particular business function

or process, such as:

Best practice knowledge: documents that describe the best and current accepted

process for various activities in an organisation.

Lessons learnt in projects, product development, and service delivery.

Intelligence for strategy and planning purposes

Best practices can provide templates, such as project plans, checklists, and document formats,

which can be downloaded for reuse, including links (e.g., e-mail) to the author of the best

practice.

Organisations are also constructing an internal portals so that employees can access multiple,

different repositories. Repositories can also provide pointers to experts within the

organisation on key knowledge topics, knowledge yellow pages, personal home pages, and

knowledge assets.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



88

It should be noted that there are caveats to IT applications, such as creating repositories, and

other connect and collect systems. In the light of our findings in the DEAAT, serious

consideration is required prior to adopting such initiatives, especially, at the expense of the

social and cultural dimensions of KM. Grover and Davenport (2001: 10), observed in a study

of 31 knowledge management projects in 1997, that by far the most common objective

involves "developing new applications of information technology to support the capture,

storage, retrieval, and distribution of explicit knowledge." This trend is evident in other KM

projects, thus, most organisations have not taken a conscious people and process oriented

approach to KM. This approach to KM can deliver much value as it enables members access

to explicit knowledge, however, the missing element is context. Botkin and Seeley (2001:17),

notes that "context gives knowledge assets its richness, detailing background information, …

context is part of the 80 percent of the knowledge that never gets captured in a database."

This underscores the immense value to the DEAAT to build and support communities of

practice.

Creating a Knowledge Asset

A knowledge asset is a way of capturing and codifying knowledge and lessons from past

experience about key areas of an organisation. Knowledge assets provide a central place

where individuals and teams across the organisation can pool their knowledge for local and

global gain. Focusing on knowledge assets would develop the right behaviours and skills

necessary for KM to flourish and expand to a group-wide capability. The context and

histories that make up knowledge assets provide a common framework to facilitate re-use of

knowledge.

In the case of the DEAAT, the audience for the knowledge asset should be internal staff

members, and other government departments. The knowledge asset would be the physical

output and an on-going artefact of a larger knowledge management initiative. Knowledge

assets should be organic and grow in knowledge as the organisation grows. Knowledge assets

can contain:

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



89

Guidelines or checklists, representing the current understanding of best practice.

Illustrations from past history or experience. This can be stories or quotes to make the

guidelines come alive.

Names and contact details of the people who hold the experience.

Artefacts and records of relevance, such as project plans, examples of solutions,

photographs, video clips, etc.

References such as websites and internal related documents (handbooks).

Refer to Appendix 17 for a guideline for creating knowledge assets (Gorelick, 2001).

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



90

12 CONCLUSION

The findings of this research indicate that there is no common, explicit or accepted

description of knowledge or KM in the Department. Its strategic objectives are not explicitly

linked to any knowledge management objectives. The first principal factor from the data

analysis highlighted the theme of organisational culture and interpersonal relationships. The

overall diagnostic score indicated a moderate level of readiness for knowledge management.

The key inhibitors of knowledge management – bureaucratic structures and procedures,

command and control management style – highlights the legacy of the Taylorian structure,

systems and ethos. This machine model has persistently stymied creativity, initiative,

innovation, and sharing – which are fundamental elements to knowledge management.

Thus, there is a significant gap between the actual knowledge management processes of the

DEAAT, and the optimal state for a government that would be considered at the cutting-edge

in the knowledge economy.

The research findings underscore the need for non-hierarchical work environments that

promote learning, valuing informal and experiential cognitive processes. A crucial area for

attention is to create flexible and connected workspaces that support access to information for

the workforce. This demands the mental liberation from the oppressive silo mentality of

functional and hierarchical barriers, not to mention the redesign of the physical workplace,

and the integration of the current databases to create a single KM portal.

To many management thinkers, knowledge management seems an obvious imperative in the

knowledge economy. However, it is the next step that is the challenge, namely what can be

done to improve the creation, sharing and use of knowledge. The proposed framework for

knowledge management provides a robust conceptual foundation with potential KM

initiatives that the DEAAT could consider as pilots.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



91

13 REFERENCES

1. Accenture, Markel, UNDP. (2001), "Creating a Development Dynamic. Final Report of the

Digital Opportunity Initiative," pp.1-173.

2. Alavi, M. and Leidner, D. (2001), “Knowledge management and knowledge management

systems: conceptual foundations and research issues,” Management Information Systems

Quarterly, Mar 2001, Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 107 –133.

3. April, K.A. (2001), "Cognitive complexity and consciousness," Power Point

presentation: MBA Elective, UCT.

4. Bannon L. J. and Kuutti, K. (2001), 'Shifting Perspectives on Organisational Memory:

from Storage to Active Remembering,' in S. Little, P. Quintas and T. Ray (Eds),

Managing Knowledge: An Essential Reader, London: Sage Publications, pp. 190 –

210.

5. Bennet, A. (2000), "Knowledge Management: Tool for Those in the Know," Federal Times,

Vol. 36, No. 34, p16.

6. Beckman, T. J. (1999), 'The Current State of Knowledge Management,' in J. Liebowitz (ed)

Knowledge Management Handbook, Florida: CRC Press, pp. 1-1 – 1-22.

7. Botkin, J. and Seeley, C. (2001), " The Knowledge Management Manifesto: Why KM

requires community-building," Knowledge Management Review," Vol. 3, No. 6, pp. 16-22.

8. Bukowitz, W. and Williams, R. (1999), The Knowledge Management Fieldbook, London:

Prentice Hall.

9. Burk, M. (2000), "Communities of Practice," Public Roads, Vol. 63, No. 6, pp.18-22.

10. Coates, J. F. (2001), “Knowledge Management is a Person-to-Person Enterprise,” Research

Technology Management, Vol. 44, No. 3, pp 9–4.

11. Cole, R. E. (1998), "Introduction," California Management Review, Vol. 45, No. 3, pp. 15-21.

12. Cranfield University. (1998), "The Cranfield/Information Strategy Knowledge Survey:

Europe's State of the Art in Knowledge Management," The Economist Group.

13. Davenport, T. H. and Prusak, L. (1998), "Working Knowledge," Boston: Harvard Business

School Press.

14. Davenport, T.H. (1999), 'Knowledge Management and the Broader Firm: Strategy,

Advantage, and Performance,' in J. Liebowitz (Ed.), Knowledge Management Handbook,

Florida: CRC Press, pp. 2-1 – 2-11.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



92

15. Deloitte Research. (2000), "At the Dawn of e-government: The Citizen as Customer," Deloitte

Consulting, pp.1-32.

16. Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology (1996), “White Paper on Science and

Technology,” Pretoria.

17. Department of Communications (2001), “Green Paper on e-Commerce,” Pretoria.

18. Department of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Tourism. Provincial Government of the

Western Cape. (2001a), “White Paper on Preparing the Western Cape for the Knowledge

Economy of the 21st Century,” Cape Town.


Western Cape. (2001b), “Cape Online Programme Discussion Document. Version 3,” Cape

Town.


Western Cape. (2001c), ”Business Plan 2001/2002,” Cape Town.

21. Department of Public Service and Administration (1997). “Batho Pele –‘People First’ White

Paper on Transforming Public Service Delivery,” Pretoria.

22. Drucker, P. (1995), "The Post-Capitalist Executive: Managing in a Time of Great Change,"

Penguin: New York.

23. Earl, M. (2001), "Knowledge Management Strategies: Toward a Taxonomy," Journal of

Management Information Systems, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 215-233.

24. Fitzgerald, L.A. (1995). Mindful Chaos, URL: http://www.orgmind.com/chaos/chaos, pp. 1-6.

25. Gorelick, C. (2001). How to Create a Knowledge Asset. MBA Programme, University of

Cape Town, Graduate School of Business.

26. Gorelick, C. and Crawford, C. (2001), "Share the Knowledge and Share the Wealth - -

Really!" Solutions for Information and Management Services, New York.

27. 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.

28. Gupta, A. and Govindarajan, V. (2001), "Knowledge Flows within Multinational

Corporations," Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 21, No.6, pp. 473-496.

29. Harvard Policy Group. (2001), "Eight Imperatives for Leaders in a Networked World:

Imperative 3 - Utilise Best Practices for Implementing IT Initiatives," John F. Kennedy School

of Government,pp.1-26.

30. Huberman, M. and Miles, M. (1994), "Qualitative Data Analysis," London: Sage Publications.

http://www.orgmind.com/chaos/chaos

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



93

31. Huseman, R. C. and Goodman, J. P. (1999), "Leading with Knowledge: The Nature of

Competition in the 21st Century," Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

32. Information Technologies Group (ITG). (2000), “Readiness for the Networked World - A

Guide for Developing Countries “ Centre for International Development at Harvard

University, URL: http://www.readinessguide.org, pp.1-20.

33. Liebowitz, J. (1999), Knowledge Management Handbook, Florida: CRC Press.

34. Martiny, M. (1998), "Knowledge Management at HP Consulting," Organizational Dynamics,

Vol. 27, No. 2, pp. 71-78.

35. McDermott, R. (1999), "Learning Across Teams: How to build communities of practice in

team organizations," Knowledge Management Review, Vol. 4, No. 8, pp. 22-30.

36. McDermott, R. (2000), “Critical Success Factors in Building Communities of Practice,”

Knowledge Management Review, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 43-49.

37. Mouton, J. and Marais, H.C. (1991), "Basic Concepts in the Methodology of the Social

Sciences," Pretoria: HSRC.

38. Nonaka, I. (1994), "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization

Science, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 14-37.

39. Nonaka, I., and Takeuchi, H. (1995), “The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese

Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation,” New York: Oxford University Press.

40. OECD. (2001), " Knowledge Management: Learning-By-Comparing Experiences from

Private Firms and Public Organisations," Public Management Committee, pp.1-28.

41. OECD. (2001), "Government of the Future," Public Management Policy Brief No. 9, pp. 1-6.

42. Probst, G; Raub, S and Romhardt, K (1998), “Managing Knowledge Management. Building

Blocks for Success,” West Sussex: Wiley.

43. Prusak, L. (1997), "Knowledge in Organisations," Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.

44. Ruggles, R. (1998), "The State of the Notion: Knowledge Management in Practice,"

California Management Review, Vol. 40, No. 3, pp. 80-89.

45. Schmidt, D. (2001), "Knowledge Management in South African Local Governments: A

Discussion Paper, Organisational Development Africa, Cape Town.

46. Schein, E.H. (1985). Organisational Culture and Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

47. Schein, E. (2000), “Don’t make culture another item on the KM checklist,” Knowledge

Management Review, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 8-9.

48. Seeley, C. and Dietrick, B. (2000), “Crafting a knowledge management strategy, Part 3”,

Knowledge Management Review, Vol. 3, No. 12, pp.18-21.

http://www.readinessguide.org/

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



94

49. Snowden, D. (1999), “The Principles and Practice of Knowledge Disclosure,” Knowledge IQ

Management, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 40-45.

50. Spender, J. C. (1996) "Organizational Knowledge, Learning, and Memory: Three Concepts in

Search of a Theory," Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 63-

78.

51. Stewart, T. (2001), “Intellectual Capital: Ten Years Later, How Far We've Come,” Fortune

(Asia), Vol. 143, No. 11, pp. 106 –107.

52. Skyrme, D.J. (1999), “Knowledge Networking: Creating the Collaborative Enterprise,”

Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

53. Yu, D. and Hartman, C. (2000), " Washington's Knowledge Management Pioneer,"

Knowledge Management Review, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 14-18.

54. Wegner, T. (2000), "Research Methodology," Cape Town: UCT GSB.

55. Zimmermann, K.A. (1999), ' Knowledge Management in Government,' in J. Liebowitz (ed.),

Knowledge Management Handbook, Florida: CRC Press, pp. 16-1 - 16-10.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

APPENDIX 16 FACTORS EMERGING FROM THE ANLAYSIS OF THE KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT PROCESSES 5 Principal Factors were extracted from the data for the questions related to CREATION of knowledge. The Factor Loadings (Eigenvalues) are provided in Appendix 12 The importance factors decrease from F1 to F5

Scores for the Individual Branches

Factor Variable (Question Numbers)

Emergent Theme around the questions

Average score

for the DEAAT

bp pm ca tr

F1 2,4,5 Mentorship and engaging in repositories of knowledge

3 3 3 3 4

F2 13,14,15 management involvement in identifying knowledge 3 3 2 3 3

F3 1 culture and team work 3 3 3 3 3 F4 10 mindshift towards

regarding people as assets 4 4 4 4 4

F5 8,9 access to knowledge 3 3 3 4 4 3 Principal Factors were extracted from the data for the questions related to SHARING of knowledge. The Factor Loadings (Eigenvalues) are provided in Appendix 13 The importance factors decrease from F1 to F3




Average score

for the DEAAT

bp pm ca tr

F1 16,24 interpersonal exchange and value of diversity of ideas 3 3 3 3 3

F2 25,28 management responsibility to remove barriers 3 3 2 3 3

F3 23,30 support for teamwork and synergy 3 3 3 3 3

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

4 Principal Factors were extracted from the data for the questions related to APPLICATION of knowledge. The Factor Loadings (Eigenvalues) are provided in Appendix 14 The importance factors decrease from F1 to F4




Average score

for the DEAAT

bp pm ca tr

F1 33,43 value of individual contributions, teamwork 3 4 3 3 3

F2 32,35,36 allowance for creativity of thought, environment 3 3 2 3 3

F3 37,38 flexibility, promotes the generation of ideas 3 3 2 3 3

F4 31 no hierarchical barriers 3 3 3 3 4 4 Principal Factors were extracted from the data for the questions related to RETENTION of knowledge. The Factor Loadings (Eigenvalues) are provided in Appendix 15 The importance factors decrease from F1 to F4




Average score for

the DEAAT

bp pm ca tr

F1 53,56,57 recognises the importance of tacit knowledge 3 2 2 3 3

F2 47,48,60 access to tools that facilitate retention of knowledge 3 3 4 3 4

F3 58 focus on core competencies 3 3 2 3 3 F4 51,55 easy retrieval of information 3 3 2 3 3

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Eigenvalues (stats_new.sta)Extraction: Principal components

% total Cumul. Cumul.Eigenval Variance Eigenval %

1 5.347815 35.6521 5.347815 35.65212 1.90559 12.70394 7.253406 48.356043 1.370348 9.135651 8.623754 57.491694 1.259219 8.394797 9.882973 65.88649

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Retention

Factor Loadings (Varimax normalized) (stats_new.sta)Extraction: Principal components(Marked loadings are > .700000)

Factor Factor Factor Factor1 2 3 4

Q46 0.651754 0.161141 0.010476 0.41447Q47 0.260531 0.850509 -0.036473 0.007513Q48 0.465948 0.78202 -0.111293 0.074307Q49 0.625979 0.385103 0.072199 0.253044Q50 0.654717 0.180853 0.453885 0.240561Q51 0.437167 -0.012971 -0.119894 0.706198Q52 0.053263 0.567134 -0.375198 0.264271Q53 0.731799 0.076279 -0.158835 -0.217143Q54 0.678539 0.00043 -0.251828 0.162918Q55 -0.043043 0.208868 0.072618 0.843722Q56 0.813516 -0.016934 0.115601 0.131646Q57 0.738757 0.298935 0.082669 0.016457Q58 0.164784 0.163019 -0.733695 0.108763Q59 0.296007 0.276403 0.522472 0.220887Q60 -0.123237 0.788102 0.220831 0.10281Expl.Var 4.059554 2.726881 1.354366 1.742172Prp.Totl 0.270637 0.181792 0.090291 0.116145


1 5.347815 35.6521 5.347815 35.65212 1.90559 12.70394 7.253406 48.356043 1.370348 9.135651 8.623754 57.491694 1.259219 8.394797 9.882973 65.88649

APPENDIX 15

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



1 6.047365 40.31577 6.047365 40.315772 1.484209 9.89473 7.531575 50.21053 1.181599 7.877329 8.713174 58.087834 1.099179 7.327863 9.812354 65.41569

COPYRIG

HT U

CT


Factor Factor Factor Factor1 2 3 4

Q31 -0.103541 0.206551 -0.08282 0.776399Q32 0.335728 0.743967 -0.000746 0.1777Q33 0.820505 0.217741 0.110784 -0.205806Q34 0.699101 0.472559 0.165726 0.027147Q35 0.15991 0.709408 0.138826 0.191995Q36 0.184371 0.764239 0.280851 0.048365Q37 -0.038995 0.444712 0.739797 0.225195Q38 0.234821 0.314613 0.700695 -0.229721Q39 0.613941 0.047485 0.315439 0.317666Q40 0.454453 0.355893 0.191042 0.316344Q41 0.50934 0.13502 0.231575 0.452252Q42 0.367099 0.155964 0.47476 0.570541Q43 0.749751 0.121109 0.378934 0.120138Q44 0.65299 0.224072 0.010236 0.00838Q45 0.388922 -0.068705 0.693241 0.115224Expl.Var 3.519053 2.492011 2.222324 1.578966Prp.Totl 0.234604 0.166134 0.148155 0.105264


1 6.047365 40.31577 6.047365 40.315772 1.484209 9.89473 7.531575 50.21053 1.181599 7.877329 8.713174 58.087834 1.099179 7.327863 9.812354 65.41569

APPENDIX 14

Application

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



1 6.35054 42.33694 6.35054 42.336942 1.436129 9.574196 7.78667 51.911133 1.156032 7.706878 8.942702 59.61801

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Sharing


Factor Factor Factor1 2 3

Q16 0.75247 0.263293 0.032712Q17 0.461446 0.466407 0.379972Q18 0.694876 0.306164 0.22115Q19 0.679925 0.204789 0.344935Q20 0.524584 -0.089164 0.522911Q21 0.637519 0.278198 0.141064Q22 0.535064 0.421569 0.208524Q23 0.214844 0.222456 0.823069Q24 0.70431 -0.083479 0.227856Q25 0.343482 0.724506 -0.10437Q26 0.138519 0.400321 0.356195Q27 0.121951 0.623522 0.531578Q28 0.085181 0.806619 0.166343Q29 0.138508 0.567745 0.423646Q30 0.29983 0.201929 0.776635Expl.Var 3.502795 2.829742 2.610165Prp.Totl 0.23352 0.188649 0.174011



1 6.35054 42.33694 6.35054 42.336942 1.436129 9.574196 7.78667 51.911133 1.156032 7.706878 8.942702 59.61801

APPENDIX 13

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



1 4.69873 31.32487 4.69873 31.324872 1.895396 12.63597 6.594126 43.960843 1.266575 8.443834 7.860701 52.404684 1.053876 7.025841 8.914578 59.430525 1.023944 6.82629 9.938521 66.25681

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Creation


Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor1 2 3 4 5

Q1 0.350086 0.0857 -0.759235 0.120023 0.021808Q2 0.837569 0.030982 -0.183635 -0.063362 0.107159Q3 0.358949 0.431375 0.481853 0.298476 -0.194043Q4 0.809249 0.148565 0.099227 -0.05233 0.180428Q5 0.813581 0.005395 -0.087117 0.031455 0.239746Q6 0.481513 0.150406 0.133153 0.379677 0.185111Q7 0.370312 0.148384 0.509294 0.121331 0.416232Q8 0.182876 0.10055 0.118426 0.003541 0.829566Q9 0.265371 0.251549 -0.114698 -0.022775 0.709013Q10 0.225313 0.266407 -0.022356 -0.734934 0.153154Q11 0.422011 0.278608 -0.232868 0.026817 0.356296Q12 0.340602 0.300104 -0.178873 0.586704 0.362924Q13 0.222587 0.715623 -0.11823 -0.019957 0.163488Q14 0.11313 0.805683 0.033421 -0.141266 0.079358Q15 -0.243547 0.721821 0.191839 0.155484 0.343314Expl.Var 3.209103 2.255443 1.302687 1.200242 1.971046Prp.Totl 0.21394 0.150363 0.086846 0.080016 0.131403


1 4.69873 31.32487 4.69873 31.324872 1.895396 12.63597 6.594126 43.960843 1.266575 8.443834 7.860701 52.404684 1.053876 7.025841 8.914578 59.430525 1.023944 6.82629 9.938521 66.25681

APPENDIX 12

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

APPENDIX 11 FACTORS EMERGING FROM THE FACTOR ANLAYSIS 16 Principal Factors were extracted from the data. The Factor Loadings (Eigenvalues) are provided in Appendix 9 The importance of the factors decrease from F1 to F16 Factor Variable

(Question Numbers)


Average score

DEAAT bp pm ca tr

F1 33,44,43 organisational culture:

interpersonal relationships; socialisation

3 3 3 3 3

F2 4,5,2 Knowledge specialists,

Updated repositories, People focused technology training

3 3 3 3 4

F3 47,48 information and systems management 3 3 4 3 3

F4 50 people management:

treating them as assets rather than costs

3 3 2 3 3

F5 13,15,58 management of core

processes and measurement of knowledge needs

3 3 2 3 3

F6 60 accessibility to a PC 4 4 4 4 4

F7 16 application of new skills from outside 3 4 2 3 4

F8 59 retention of valuable tacit knowledge 3 3 2 3 3

F9 23 support for mutual learning 3 3 3 3 3 F10 3 knowledge champion 3 3 3 3 4

F11 24 disagreement = opportunity to learn 3 3 3 3 3

F12 28 knowledge behaviour built into appraisal 3 3 1 3 3

F13 11 leadership recognition of the importance of KM 3 3 2 3 3

F14 40 creative (playful) problem-

solving environment

3 3 2 3 3

F15 53 documentation of tacit knowledge 2 2 2 3 3

F16 7 availability of information management systems 4 3 3 4 4

bp = Business Promotion and Tourism ca = Corporate Affairs pm = Property Management and Works tr = Transport and Infrastructure

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

FACTORS USED FOR THE COMPARISON OF RESPONSES 10 The 16 Principal Factors were extracted from the data were used to assess the scores for the categorised responses, i.e., according to Years of Service (four levels) and Designation (three levels).

Years of Service Designation Factor

Emergent Theme around

the questions

Ave score

for the DEAAT

<3

4-10

11-15

>15

SenMgt

SenTec Ad

Gen Ad Oth

F1 organisational culture:

interpersonal relationships; socialisation

3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3

F2

Knowledge specialists, Updated repositories,

People focused technology training

3 3 3 3 4 4 3 3

F3 information and systems management 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3

F4 people management:

treating them as assets rather than costs

3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3

F5

management of core processes and

measurement of knowledge needs

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

F6 accessibility to a PC 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

F7 application of new skills from outside 3 3 4 3 4 4 3 3

F8 retention of valuable tacit knowledge 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3

F9 support for mutual learning 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 F10 knowledge champion 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 3

F11 disagreement = opportunity to learn 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3

F12 knowledge behaviour built into appraisal 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 3

F13 leadership recognition of the importance of KM 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3

F14 creative (playful) problem-

solving environment

3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3

F15 documentation of tacit knowledge 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 3

F16 availability of information management systems 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Summary Frequency Table (stats_new.sta)Table: BRANCH(5) x Q58(5)

Q58 Q58 Q58 Q58 Q58 Rowv.low low moderate high v.high Totals

Bus. Prom &Tourism 0 2 4 3 1 10Prop.Mgt & Works 3 3 4 3 1 14Trans. & Infrastruc 1 4 11 9 1 26KEEG 0 0 0 1 0 1Corp. Affairs 1 1 8 6 1 17All Grps 5 10 27 22 4 68

Statistics: BRANCH(5) x Q58(5) (stats_new.sta)

Chi-square df pPearson Chi-square 10.45489 df=16 p=.84181M-L Chi-square 10.42624 df=16 p=.84343

Conclusion: No evidence to suggest an association between Branch and Q58at the 95% confidence level

Summary Frequency Table (stats_new.sta)Table: DESIG(3) x Q58(5)


Sen Mgt 2 4 2 7 1 16Sen T/A 2 1 16 8 2 29Gen/Oth 1 5 9 7 1 23All Grps 5 10 27 22 4 68

Statistics: DESIG(3) x Q58(5) (stats_new.sta)


Conclusion: No evidence to suggest an association between Designation and Q58at the 95% confidence level

Summary Frequency Table (stats_new.sta)Table: EXP(4) x Q58(5)


< 3 yrs 5 5 13 17 1 414-10 yrs 0 0 3 1 0 411-15 yr 0 2 4 0 1 7> 15 yrs 0 3 7 4 2 16All Grps 5 10 27 22 4 68

Statistics: EXP(4) x Q58(5) (stats_new.sta)

Chi-square df p

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Pearson Chi-square 14.41117 df=12 p=.27524M-L Chi-square 18.42538 df=12 p=.10339

Conclusion: No evidence to suggest an association between Years of Service and Q58at the 95% confidence level

COPYRIG

HT U

CT


Q15 Q15 Q15 Q15 Q15 Rowv. low low moderate high v. high Totals















Chi-square df p

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



COPYRIG

HT U

CT












Conclusion: Possible association between Designation and Q13 but p Value is highat the 95% confidence level






Conclusion: No evidence to suggest an association between Years of Service and Q13

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

at the 95% confidence level

COPYRIG

HT U

CT


Q50 Q50 Q50 Q50 Q50 Rowv. low low moderate high v.high Totals















Chi-square df p

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



COPYRIG

HT U

CT












Conclusion: The p value is highat the 95% confidence level Chi sq crit = 2.73264





Chi-square df p

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



COPYRIG

HT U

CT











Chi-square df pPearson Chi-square 6.134743 df=8 p=.63214M-L Chi-square 7.054074 df=8 p=.53081Conclusion: No evidence to suggest an association between Designation and Q47

at the 95% confidence level





Chi-square df pPearson Chi-square 13.47116 df=12 p=.33576

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

M-L Chi-square 14.03707 df=12 p=.29837

Conclusion: No evidence to suggest an association between Years of Experience and Q47at the 95% confidence level

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

















Chi-square df p

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



COPYRIG

HT U

CT

















Chi-square df p

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



COPYRIG

HT U

CT


Q2 Q2 Q2 Q2 Q2 Rowv. low low moderate high v high Totals















Chi-square df pPearson Chi-square 9.37184 df=12 p=.67088

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

M-L Chi-square 10.99543 df=12 p=.52932


COPYRIG

HT U

CT

















Chi-square df p

COPYRIG

HT U

CT


Conclusion: No evidence to suggest an association between Years of Services and Q44at the 95% confidence level

COPYRIG

HT U

CT


Q43 Q43 Q43 Q43 Q43 Rowv.low low moderate high v high Totals















Chi-square df p

COPYRIG

HT U

CT



COPYRIG

HT U

CT















Statistics: EXP(4) x Q33(5) (stats_new.sta)Chi-square df p



APPENDIX 10

SCREE PLOT

APPENDIX 9

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Number of Eigenvalues

Eige

nval

ue

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

The Eigenvalues flattens rapidly out after Factor 5, implying that these factors are of less significance. Factors 1 to 5 have high loadings implying that they form key themes that emerge from the data. Factor One, has the highest Eigenvalue and therefore explains most of the variation of the responses.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Eigenvalues (stats_new.sta)Extraction: Principal componentsFACTOR % total Cumul. Cumul.

Eigenval Variance Eigenval %1 17.57858 29.29764 17.57858 29.297642 4.687864 7.813106 22.26645 37.110753 3.652006 6.086676 25.91845 43.197424 2.916289 4.860482 28.83474 48.05795 2.55878 4.264633 31.39352 52.322546 2.287734 3.812891 33.68126 56.135437 2.134513 3.557522 35.81577 59.692958 1.933894 3.223157 37.74966 62.916119 1.691864 2.819773 39.44153 65.7358810 1.635665 2.726108 41.07719 68.4619911 1.495907 2.493179 42.5731 70.9551712 1.351261 2.252101 43.92436 73.2072713 1.296664 2.161106 45.22102 75.3683714 1.222465 2.037442 46.44349 77.4058215 1.09673 1.827883 47.54022 79.233716 1.032248 1.720413 48.57247 80.95411

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Factor Loadings (Varimax normalized) (stats_new.sta)Extraction: Principal components(Marked loadings are > .700000)Question Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor(or variable) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16Q1 0.331656 0.079629 0.165318 0.389311 -0.213267 0.441972 0.106879 0.16124 0.224075 -0.098724 0.113762 0.113549 -0.026848 0.251927 -0.095785 -0.157978Q2 0.333134 0.70283 0.369515 0.104374 -0.056162 0.067 0.049133 0.010554 0.188845 0.032669 0.064128 0.112881 -0.013606 -0.181281 0.079736 -0.01282Q3 -0.018712 0.128888 0.01015 0.086644 0.110303 0.031938 0.06487 -0.015216 -0.026947 0.853058 -0.04495 0.185612 -0.032539 0.072271 0.014701 0.076112Q4 0.008281 0.782011 0.117818 0.052071 0.068973 -0.005818 0.086783 0.082755 0.086741 0.11315 0.267464 0.204011 0.056356 0.039561 -0.040683 0.029813Q5 0.029975 0.805879 0.086215 0.035717 0.05165 0.14307 0.012654 0.064083 0.310294 -0.029287 -0.149109 0.080793 0.120718 0.087859 0.018724 0.151367Q6 -0.04218 0.540939 0.259826 0.101596 0.044447 -0.132902 -0.120076 0.023917 -0.1137 0.256714 -0.060265 0.053277 -0.003948 0.532215 -0.180975 -0.025472Q7 -0.050258 0.296133 0.089825 0.166931 0.166587 -0.024038 -0.053575 -0.092862 0.024364 0.405748 0.122834 0.190479 0.152258 -0.02077 0.11522 0.567387Q8 -0.115372 0.388901 0.054453 0.090244 0.180431 -0.012789 0.060778 0.328527 0.190438 0.029715 0.037565 0.458358 0.329991 0.100165 0.33868 0.0302Q9 0.061364 0.22811 0.344648 0.152049 0.045159 0.023841 -0.291128 0.32069 0.202015 0.032206 0.171957 0.25477 0.235762 0.342769 0.230804 0.111804Q10 0.224956 0.273901 -0.140751 0.100485 -0.083392 0.506576 0.129967 0.258614 0.206027 0.254438 0.030775 -0.344875 0.073154 -0.035749 -0.058882 0.281834Q11 0.186284 0.170283 0.275989 0.240056 0.085866 0.099023 -0.013832 0.058116 0.067329 0.011309 0.115136 0.205108 0.675845 -0.028994 -0.145849 0.047036Q12 -0.007646 0.251479 0.019792 0.353652 0.047744 0.042319 -0.24318 0.015503 0.088457 0.237111 -0.087797 0.653686 0.102219 0.03929 0.00737 0.055469Q13 -0.06161 0.216397 0.165807 0.065751 0.726422 0.259801 0.028415 -0.118382 0.21405 0.118106 0.103673 0.21429 -0.038031 -0.103316 -0.020213 -0.084668Q14 -0.048619 -0.107249 0.292817 0.014921 0.430052 -0.041461 0.053591 0.109664 0.284516 0.47364 0.192442 -0.005259 0.289346 0.132755 -0.168072 0.05141Q15 -0.209983 -0.111262 -0.082752 0.168043 0.704401 0.046974 -0.031708 0.104916 0.027675 0.184846 0.202843 0.177718 -0.002795 0.355194 0.011141 0.112069Q16 0.165572 0.155198 0.115083 0.09439 0.161181 0.057938 0.769109 -0.066536 0.198426 0.118115 0.166465 0.114566 -0.035684 0.103914 0.031508 -0.055203Q17 0.482477 0.146946 -0.123946 0.048055 0.054089 -0.028218 -0.013675 0.156037 0.633806 0.140664 0.207752 0.206595 0.034501 0.065569 0.099972 -0.119525Q18 0.308225 0.119633 0.116064 -0.040643 -0.033455 -0.035372 0.103015 -0.159265 0.67529 0.035042 0.190925 0.115029 0.185105 0.240709 0.293158 -0.007604Q19 0.366814 0.246862 -0.188484 0.450629 -0.040896 0.093366 0.194542 0.105627 0.236264 0.324484 0.211246 0.098326 0.216464 0.226996 0.199324 -0.020868Q20 0.462511 -0.098605 0.115073 -0.128129 0.327613 0.1596 0.014512 0.095646 0.280434 0.282785 0.274129 0.01752 -0.163954 -0.124075 0.169737 0.360215Q21 0.238887 0.320849 -0.054181 0.176067 0.083796 -0.216995 0.087455 0.085611 0.197965 -0.294346 0.615436 0.174487 0.1011 0.040085 -0.006995 -0.307964Q22 0.257517 0.258528 -0.064692 0.134017 -0.081603 0.176072 0.339066 -0.177934 0.655786 -0.06596 0.016832 0.246719 0.077777 -0.031351 0.054775 0.035244Q23 0.074199 0.181724 0.077188 0.32625 0.123827 0.116525 -0.047552 0.239581 0.703881 -0.12852 0.034068 0.123723 0.014202 0.066589 0.089344 0.174594Q24 0.027081 0.058415 0.116192 0.068546 0.18635 0.156293 0.098443 0.086577 0.137245 0.101616 0.762216 0.018872 0.069392 0.029015 0.078159 0.144398Q25 0.149576 0.149121 0.154558 0.116061 0.250085 -0.244052 0.016979 -0.051698 0.071883 -0.020518 0.117372 0.650202 0.149247 0.328502 -0.075281 0.165242Q26 0.391909 0.065176 0.170369 0.092732 -0.114017 0.145162 0.195402 -0.127972 0.283568 -0.203456 0.059114 0.325641 0.173938 0.053681 -0.391202 0.330447Q27 0.023056 0.090289 0.090426 0.099785 0.136423 -0.044367 0.028852 0.010956 0.677196 0.179514 0.030961 0.498526 -0.029519 0.001235 -0.179749 -0.009575Q28 0.055998 -0.001327 0.023268 0.115764 0.054461 0.11262 0.068061 0.026842 0.27574 0.175996 0.046194 0.81344 0.034674 -0.056746 -0.011997 -0.172451Q29 0.168151 0.080942 0.199377 0.465129 0.200869 -0.010328 0.03059 0.354804 0.508281 -0.021277 0.060964 0.170807 0.091964 0.007995 -0.117879 -0.044559Q30 0.284329 0.086314 0.129993 0.493721 0.086164 0.022347 0.018323 0.132036 0.552139 0.143427 0.087107 0.068228 0.139633 -0.051574 0.039306 -0.020124

APPENDIX 8

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Question Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor(or variable) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16Q31 0.07202 0.276854 -0.108118 -0.07052 0.353519 -0.074342 -0.125707 0.174959 0.173844 0.1641 -0.437589 0.240154 0.36941 0.078764 0.151961 -0.02938Q32 0.316793 0.056194 -0.124249 0.216992 0.298594 -0.187733 -0.09923 -0.41393 0.482401 -0.248384 -0.100006 0.1554 -0.138487 0.152932 0.060182 0.118432Q33 0.725304 -0.048924 0.095662 0.206583 -0.020567 -0.021758 0.181393 0.254618 0.11525 -0.056384 -0.005294 -0.001477 -0.168675 0.190075 -0.11982 -0.026989Q34 0.598339 0.147358 0.048231 0.307968 0.302311 0.102176 0.03649 0.031742 0.231911 -0.31212 -0.013389 0.11274 -0.12668 0.221572 -0.081409 0.13532Q35 0.141329 0.138314 0.140274 0.1494 0.252026 -0.089886 0.106512 0.102988 0.165949 -0.090813 0.075789 0.547583 -0.256723 0.225837 0.17459 0.25927Q36 0.284385 0.169359 -0.005059 0.28321 0.086156 -0.086585 -0.101126 -0.047714 0.516247 -0.042443 -0.019439 0.24098 -0.148516 0.042962 0.064066 0.431943Q37 0.075681 0.234818 0.117747 0.527041 0.034528 0.20654 -0.367195 -0.211934 0.277491 0.075011 0.019952 0.264732 0.01541 0.089046 0.234353 0.167584Q38 0.214414 0.128099 0.266057 0.589669 -0.170587 0.006828 -0.016899 0.126483 0.292532 0.030899 0.012232 0.227169 -0.241129 0.257855 -0.045629 -0.089129Q39 0.526482 0.272307 0.368889 0.026647 -0.131286 0.114283 0.174101 -0.129464 0.341606 -0.036288 -0.115933 0.137738 0.2163 0.185 -0.048617 0.040211Q40 0.348043 -0.038644 -0.121447 0.121669 0.150599 0.146852 0.109418 -0.081471 0.240333 0.056565 0.018988 0.247685 -0.023048 0.675151 0.149549 -0.02071Q41 0.560196 0.199486 0.097783 0.310494 0.133022 0.369563 0.097337 -0.070596 0.212464 -0.124943 -0.12086 0.158159 0.088606 -0.152705 0.107813 -0.207159Q42 0.232666 0.307713 0.139461 0.12101 0.188231 0.360923 0.128836 -0.094024 0.168907 -0.068325 0.099267 0.452238 0.319177 0.226875 0.101521 -0.032181Q43 0.751485 0.174345 -0.031758 0.290231 -0.111344 0.083366 0.068237 0.081203 0.206129 -0.070961 0.24878 0.037886 0.077958 0.046222 0.102162 -0.039641Q44 0.769594 -0.157334 0.006442 0.144436 -0.028793 0.073637 -0.169678 -0.000974 0.073195 0.05014 0.037204 -0.054584 0.075657 0.040643 0.122608 0.079306Q45 0.319679 -0.061405 0.226965 0.477111 -0.14181 0.495336 0.005874 -0.040148 -0.000141 -0.102136 0.119706 0.153722 0.114188 -0.039638 0.047192 0.102252Q46 0.406701 0.017761 0.187971 0.616644 0.210054 -0.055539 0.106885 0.000569 0.208713 0.389567 -0.076701 0.003051 0.074638 -0.004105 0.11676 -0.074092Q47 0.026409 0.226355 0.833312 0.194707 0.201847 0.189939 0.027641 0.136359 -0.021146 0.130266 0.116485 0.026607 0.041059 0.00366 0.061075 -0.072801Q48 0.118134 0.199935 0.812858 0.295536 0.135312 0.166104 0.035412 0.089564 0.092639 -0.037296 0.032218 0.136196 0.087036 -0.009519 0.146454 0.098412Q49 0.146272 0.056235 0.456419 0.513178 -0.068597 0.058688 -0.076017 -0.078252 0.202591 -0.074518 0.01722 0.312998 0.213533 0.178338 0.032576 0.227749Q50 0.209129 0.033514 0.066986 0.833462 -0.035244 0.120137 0.041935 0.109711 -0.03631 0.041622 0.203382 0.140544 0.075008 0.075311 0.001722 0.011686Q51 0.596184 0.244322 0.013529 0.33751 0.051659 -0.157829 -0.218574 -0.043393 0.223672 0.20661 -0.036659 0.041957 0.351292 -0.083588 0.073221 -0.011386Q52 0.605125 0.184183 0.423094 -0.102738 -0.090661 0.228733 0.267599 0.06178 0.01634 0.076934 -0.10262 0.122468 0.196046 -0.091133 -0.027923 0.171466Q53 0.177931 -0.005253 0.201438 0.257081 -0.005358 -0.076566 0.092867 -0.02393 0.145763 -0.001312 0.056262 0.205364 -0.089273 0.052768 0.799058 0.080413Q54 0.020701 0.122949 0.055426 0.256911 0.156338 -0.002616 0.047194 0.002455 0.199333 0.010064 -0.021268 0.697993 0.096485 0.048482 0.206943 0.1596Q55 0.440145 0.139243 0.132101 -0.010158 0.094758 0.183564 -0.548088 0.07715 0.175084 -4.38E-05 -0.110275 0.278384 -0.038369 0.174372 -0.373176 -0.103046Q56 0.092422 -0.076936 0.021606 0.588096 0.307071 0.002874 -0.101916 0.112299 0.228773 -0.125795 -0.081984 0.337778 0.062898 0.066535 0.252088 0.227084Q57 0.083137 0.097879 0.24329 0.612318 0.01574 0.094417 0.300752 0.247113 0.209778 0.104469 -0.062696 0.2877 0.044477 -0.112562 0.20312 0.097096Q58 0.161567 0.055494 0.257722 -0.167714 0.65029 -0.224178 0.150469 -0.039693 -0.064022 -0.003706 -0.023076 0.227734 0.167284 -0.012077 0.035599 0.089406Q59 0.196631 0.117102 0.142011 0.243779 -0.017822 0.112723 -0.089113 0.825028 0.044604 -0.02396 0.072881 0.021086 0.010793 -0.018026 -0.003653 -0.035962Q60 0.0885 0.033915 0.406359 0.072796 0.144458 0.741672 -0.071015 0.112096 -0.099836 0.044373 0.062141 -0.046675 0.003799 0.045534 -0.11574 -0.032322Expl.Var 5.949641 3.734703 3.365085 5.277674 2.931253 2.324091 1.939028 1.918857 5.093725 2.346311 1.927718 4.671045 1.788504 1.865092 1.874263 1.565477Prp.Totl 0.099161 0.062245 0.056085 0.087961 0.048854 0.038735 0.032317 0.031981 0.084895 0.039105 0.032129 0.077851 0.029808 0.031085 0.031238 0.026091

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

BOX AND WHISKER PLOT

Question Number

Rat

ing

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Q46 Q47 Q48 Q49 Q50 Q51 Q52 Q53 Q54 Q55 Q56 Q57 Q58 Q59 Q60

Min-Max25%-75%Median value


Question Number

Rat

ing

0

1

2

3

4

5

6




Question Number

Rat

ing

0

1

2

3

4

5

6


Min-Max

25%-75%

Median value


Question Number

Rat

ing

0

1

2

3

4

5

6



KNOWLEDGE CREATION Dispersion of Scores

KNOWLEDGE SHARING Dispersion of Scores

KNOWLEDGE APPLICATION Dispersion of Scores

KNOWLEDGE RETENTION Dispersion of Scores

APPENDIX 7

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Count Branch Designation Years of Service Q1 Q2 Q338 tr 3 3 2 430 tr 2 4 2 4 444 tr 2 4 4 4 445 tr 2 4 4 4 148 tr 2 4 4 4 349 tr 2 4 3 4 427 tr 3 4 4 331 tr 3 1 3 3 334 tr 3 1 3 4 436 tr 3 1 5 5 437 tr 3 4 2 4 439 tr 3 1 1 1 240 tr 3 1 4 1 141 tr 3 3 4 4 342 tr 3 1 4 5 443 tr 3 2 4 3 346 tr 3 1 1 4 447 tr 3 4 4 3 450 tr 3 3 3 4 452 tr 3 4 2 3 328 tr 4 4 3 4 229 tr 4 3 4 4 232 tr 4 1 3 4 333 tr 4 4 1 5 351 tr 4 4 2 4 453 tr 4 4 2 2 454 tr 4 4 3 2 3

Count 27Average 3 4 3Standard Dev 1.11 1.05 0.96Skewness -0.37 -1.13 -1.05

ALLCREATION 3SHARING 3APPLICATION 3RETENTION 3

average F1 3F2 4F3 3F4 3F5 3F6 4F7 4F8 3

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

F9 3F10 4F11 3F12 3F13 3F14 3F15 3F16 4

creation F1 4 sharingF2 3F3 3F4 4F5 4

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q122 3 4 4 4 24 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 34 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 45 4 3 4 3 4 5 4 24 4 4 1 4 2 4 2 25 4 4 4 3 4 5 2 33 4 4 4 4 4 3 32 3 3 4 3 2 4 4 45 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 45 4 4 5 5 4 5 5 44 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 43 3 3 2 3 2 4 1 21 1 1 1 4 4 3 3 34 4 5 2 3 4 4 3 35 5 4 4 4 4 4 3 44 3 3 4 4 2 4 3 33 4 2 5 4 3 5 3 23 5 5 4 3 4 4 3 33 3 3 4 4 3 3 2 34 4 4 5 5 2 4 2 34 4 2 4 4 4 4 2 34 3 4 5 4 4 4 3 43 4 5 5 4 4 4 3 34 3 3 4 4 3 3 5 34 4 3 4 4 4 4 2 34 3 2 4 3 2 4 3 32 3 3 3 5 3

4 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 31.04 0.81 0.98 1.11 0.62 0.84 0.59 0.99 0.65

-0.70 -1.26 -0.34 -1.42 0.29 -0.82 0.00 0.51 -0.11

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

F1 3 applicationF1 3 retention F1 3F2 3 F2 3 F2 4F3 3 F3 3 F3 3

F4 4 F4 3

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 Q19 Q20 Q213 3 2 3 12 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 24 4 3 4 4 4 3 4 32 2 2 4 2 3 3 2 43 3 2 4 2 2 2 1 23 3 3 4 4 5 3 4 33 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 33 4 4 3 2 3 2 4 12 4 2 3 4 4 4 4 35 4 4 5 5 4 5 4 44 4 4 4 4 4 2 4 21 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 13 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 32 4 3 4 3 4 2 2 23 4 5 5 4 3 5 4 44 3 2 4 3 4 3 4 23 4 2 4 3 4 2 3 14 4 4 4 2 3 2 3 22 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 33 4 3 4 4 5 3 4 33 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 34 3 3 3 2 3 1 2 33 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 33 3 3 5 1 3 1 3 33 4 3 4 4 4 3 4 34 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 23 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 4

3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 30.85 0.64 0.82 0.80 1.06 0.90 1.03 1.01 0.93

-0.07 -0.67 0.39 -1.50 -0.29 -0.75 0.43 -0.84 -0.29

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q22 Q23 Q24 Q25 Q26 Q27 Q28 Q29 Q304 3 1 3 3 3 23 2 2 3 3 2 2 3 34 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 44 4 4 2 4 2 2 3 44 2 2 3 4 2 3 2 35 4 3 3 4 3 1 2 33 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 45 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 44 4 3 4 5 4 4 2 54 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 54 4 2 4 4 4 4 4 41 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 23 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 33 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 25 4 3 4 5 4 4 4 44 4 2 3 3 3 4 3 34 4 2 2 3 4 1 4 44 4 3 3 4 4 3 4 34 2 2 3 3 4 4 3 35 3 4 4 3 3 2 2 34 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 43 3 3 4 4 4 3 4 33 4 3 4 4 3 3 4 43 1 3 3 3 1 3 1 24 3 4 4 3 3 3 2 34 3 4 3 3 4 3 3 44 3 3 4 4 3 4 3 4

4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 30.85 1.02 0.91 0.84 0.85 0.96 1.00 0.98 0.81

-1.18 -0.80 -0.36 -0.82 -0.75 -0.96 -0.70 -0.45 -0.11

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q31 Q32 Q33 Q34 Q35 Q36 Q37 Q38 Q393 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 2 2 2 2 3 4

4 2 4 4 2 4 3 4 42 2 3 3 2 2 2 3 44 2 3 3 2 1 2 4 43 4 4 4 5 4 3 4 44 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 44 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 44 4 4 4 2 5 4 4 44 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 44 4 2 2 4 4 4 4 44 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 23 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 33 2 3 3 2 3 2 3 44 4 3 4 4 3 3 4 43 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 44 3 2 1 1 2 3 2 44 2 2 2 3 3 2 3 33 3 3 2 2 3 4 3 34 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 44 4 2 4 4 4 3 4 43 2 4 4 4 2 3 5 44 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 43 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 44 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 33 4 2 2 2 4 2 2 43 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 4

4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 40.58 1.01 0.91 1.13 1.01 1.06 0.92 1.05 0.53

-0.82 -0.24 -0.33 -0.20 0.24 -0.35 0.11 -0.45 -1.98

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q44 Q45 Q46 Q47 Q482 3 3 1 2 3 3 32 4 3 3 2 3 3 3 32 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 42 3 4 4 2 3 2 4 43 4 4 3 1 2 2 4 43 4 3 4 3 2 3 3 43 4 4 4 2 4 4 4 44 4 4 4 1 4 4 4 43 4 4 5 3 2 4 4 43 4 4 4 2 4 4 5 52 2 4 2 2 2 2 4 41 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 13 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 34 3 2 3 2 3 3 4 34 4 5 4 4 3 4 4 33 4 4 3 1 2 2 4 31 3 2 2 2 2 4 4 43 4 4 2 1 1 3 4 43 3 2 2 2 3 4 3 33 2 4 3 1 2 2 2 22 4 2 4 5 3 4 4 42 3 3 3 1 4 3 4 44 4 4 4 2 4 4 4 41 3 4 3 1 3 2 5 53 2 4 4 1 2 2 2 23 3 2 3 1 1 3 1 13 4 2 4 2 2 3 4 3

3 3 3 3 2 3 3 4 30.88 0.84 1.00 1.00 1.02 0.98 0.88 0.93 1.01

-0.37 -1.25 -0.75 -0.65 1.26 -0.05 -0.37 -1.09 -0.94

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q49 Q50 Q51 Q52 Q53 Q54 Q55 Q56 Q573 1 3 3 1 1 3 2 33 3 3 4 2 2 3 2 34 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 43 4 2 4 2 2 2 2 33 2 1 5 2 2 3 2 42 1 4 4 4 4 3 3 34 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 44 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 4 4 5 4 3 4 3 45 5 3 5 3 4 4 3 44 2 2 4 2 2 4 2 21 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 13 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 33 2 2 3 1 2 4 1 24 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 32 3 1 4 3 3 2 3 32 1 4 4 2 2 2 2 43 2 2 4 1 4 4 2 43 2 4 4 4 4 3 2 42 1 3 4 3 4 2 1 24 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 43 3 3 4 2 4 5 2 34 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 43 2 2 5 5 3 1 1 32 1 3 4 3 4 2 2 23 3 2 3 2 3 2 2 33 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 3

3 3 3 4 3 3 3 2 30.89 1.24 1.05 0.68 1.10 1.04 0.96 0.97 0.83

-0.23 0.04 -0.41 -0.72 0.09 -0.61 -0.40 0.30 -0.80

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q58 Q59 Q60 1 4

3 3 42 4 52 4 44 2 54 1 43 4 54 3 44 4 44 3 54 2 41 4 44 3 43 3 43 4 43 3 53 2 43 4 53 2 23 3 24 4 22 4 54 4 55 2 43 3 23 1 22 4 4

3 3 40.90 1.04 1.04

-0.41 -0.67 -0.97

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Count Branch Designation Years of Service Q1 Q2 Q3 Q460 cf 4 1 3 3 2 361 cf 3 4 3 4 3 462 cf 4 1 4 4 4 563 cf 4 3 3 4 464 cf 3 1 4 2 4 265 cf 3 1 2 2 2 266 cf 3 2 2 2 2 267 cf 4 1 5 3 4 468 cf 4 1 2 4 4 469 cf 4 4 4 3 2 370 cf 4 3 4 4 4 471 cf 4 1 3 4 4 472 cf 4 1 4 3 4 473 cf 4 1 3 4 4 474 cf 2 1 3 3 3 375 cf 3 1 4 4 4 476 cf 3 1 2 2 4 4

Count 17Average 3 3 3 4Standard Dev 0.90 0.83 0.89 0.87Skewness 0.05 -0.50 -0.89 -0.74


average F1 3F2 3F3 3F4 3F5 3F6 4F7 3F8 3F9 3F10 3F11 3F12 3F13 3F14 3F15 3F16 4

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

creation F1 3 sharing F1F2 3 F2F3 3 F3F4 4F5 4

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q133 4 5 4 3 3 3 2 25 4 5 5 5 5 5 4 44 4 4 4 5 5 3 4 42 2 4 4 3 4 2 3 32 4 4 4 5 4 2 3 22 2 2 3 3 3 1 3 32 3 3 2 1 2 1 3 33 3 4 4 4 5 4 3 44 4 4 4 4 4 2 4 34 2 4 3 2 5 2 3 24 2 4 5 5 5 4 4 43 3 4 4 4 2 4 4 43 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 33 3 4 4 3 5 2 2 34 3 4 3 3 4 3 3 33 4 3 3 3 5 4 4 42 3 3 3 3 4 2 3 3

3 3 4 4 3 4 3 3 30.93 0.78 0.85 0.79 1.18 1.06 1.15 0.66 0.730.28 -0.22 -0.74 -0.12 -0.15 -0.71 0.24 -0.29 -0.29

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

3 applicationF1 3 retention F1 33 F2 3 F2 33 F3 3 F3 3

F4 3 F4 3

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 Q19 Q20 Q21 Q223 3 2 2 3 2 3 3 34 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 43 3 5 3 5 4 5 3 43 3 4 3 4 3 4 2 44 4 4 3 4 4 4 2 23 4 3 4 4 1 2 4 42 3 4 1 2 1 1 2 34 3 4 4 5 4 3 3 52 2 2 2 2 2 3 1 22 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 44 5 3 3 3 3 4 2 43 3 3 4 4 2 4 3 43 2 3 2 3 1 1 1 42 3 4 4 4 5 3 3 44 3 4 2 3 2 2 2 34 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 43 4 3 2 2 2 2 3 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 40.78 0.83 0.80 0.95 0.94 1.22 1.14 0.80 0.87-0.22 0.24 -0.10 -0.10 0.03 0.31 -0.41 -0.31 -0.74

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q23 Q24 Q25 Q26 Q27 Q28 Q29 Q30 Q312 3 5 4 1 1 3 3 34 4 3 4 3 2 4 4 44 4 3 4 4 2 0 5 33 3 3 2 3 2 3 2 44 4 4 2 2 2 4 4 43 4 3 3 4 4 2 3 33 1 3 3 2 1 2 3 23 3 3 4 4 4 5 5 42 3 4 3 3 3 2 2 34 3 2 4 2 3 2 2 45 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 34 3 4 2 4 4 4 4 43 1 3 2 2 2 2 3 43 4 2 3 2 2 3 4 32 4 4 4 3 2 3 4 34 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 32 3 4 2 2 2 4 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 30.90 0.95 0.79 0.86 0.90 1.01 1.22 1.00 0.690.05 -1.38 0.12 -0.24 -0.05 0.33 -0.69 -0.15 -0.46

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q32 Q33 Q34 Q35 Q36 Q37 Q38 Q39 Q403 2 2 3 4 4 3 3 33 4 5 2 4 4 3 4 32 3 2 3 4 4 2 4 43 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 32 5 2 4 2 2 4 4 43 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 35 3 4 3 3 2 3 3 23 4 4 3 3 2 3 5 43 2 1 3 3 2 2 4 33 1 2 3 4 4 2 3 23 2 3 4 3 4 2 3 34 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 31 1 1 1 1 3 3 4 34 4 4 2 3 5 4 4 53 2 2 2 2 3 2 4 24 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 43 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 30.90 1.10 1.26 0.86 0.94 1.01 0.77 0.87 0.86-0.13 0.35 0.21 -0.43 -0.52 0.01 0.59 -0.31 0.43

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q41 Q42 Q43 Q44 Q45 Q46 Q47 Q48 Q493 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 44 5 4 3 4 3 4 4 45 5 5 2 3 3 3 4 44 3 3 4 4 3 4 4 22 2 4 4 2 4 4 4 33 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 12 2 2 1 2 3 2 3 35 5 4 5 5 5 4 4 44 3 2 2 2 2 3 3 43 2 3 3 4 2 1 2 33 3 3 2 3 3 3 4 34 4 4 4 2 4 4 4 42 3 3 1 4 2 3 15 4 5 4 3 4 3 3 34 3 3 2 3 3 4 3 34 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 43 2 3 2 3 3 2 2 2

4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 31.01 1.05 0.87 1.25 1.06 1.00 1.03 0.93 1.03-0.09 0.44 0.31 0.07 0.00 0.00 -0.91 -1.13 -0.91

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q50 Q51 Q52 Q53 Q54 Q55 Q56 Q57 Q583 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 44 4 5 1 3 4 4 4 55 4 2 2 3 4 4 3 43 3 4 2 3 2 3 34 2 4 5 2 2 3 4 41 1 1 2 2 3 3 2 33 1 2 2 3 1 3 2 33 5 5 3 4 3 3 4 41 2 5 2 3 3 2 2 32 1 4 2 3 3 2 3 33 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 32 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 1 4 1 1 3 1 1 14 4 4 5 3 4 2 3 22 2 4 2 3 3 2 3 44 4 4 2 3 3 3 4 34 2 3 2 2 2 3 4 3

3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 31.14 1.31 1.12 1.23 0.73 0.82 0.83 0.90 0.92-0.41 0.05 -0.85 0.92 -0.81 -0.84 -0.24 -0.71 -0.67

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q59 Q601 35 45 32 25 31 21 13 42 32 44 54 41 43 53 52 54 4

3 41.47 1.180.21 -0.63

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Count Br Des Yrs of Serv. Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q181 bp 1 1 = < 3 yrs 3 3 4 1 1 3 3 2 1 5 3 3 1 3 2 3 3 2

25 pm 1 1 4 4 4 4 5 5 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 2 2 4 3 36 bp 2 1 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 2 4 3 4 3 3 2 4 4 3

10 pm 2 1 2 4 3 4 3 3 4 3 4 4 2 3 3 4 2 4 2 317 pm 2 3 = 11-15 yrs 4 4 2 2 4 4 4 2 4 4 2 4 4 3 2 2 2 420 pm 2 1 1 3 3 4 2 3 4 4 4 5 3 2 3 4 3 2 3 224 pm 2 1 5 5 1 2 3 1 1 2 2 5 1 1 2 3 1 4 4 430 tr 2 4= > 15 yrs 2 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 2 244 tr 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 445 tr 2 4 4 4 1 5 4 3 4 3 4 5 4 2 2 2 2 4 2 348 tr 2 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 1 4 2 4 2 2 3 3 2 4 2 249 tr 2 4 3 4 4 5 4 4 4 3 4 5 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 557 bp 2 1 3 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 2 3 2 4 4 458 bp 2 1 3 5 3 4 3 3 4 4 3 5 3 4 4 4 3 3 459 bp 2 1 3 5 1 4 5 3 2 3 2 4 3 2 4 3 2 4 4 474 cf 2 1 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 2 34 bp 3 1 3 3 2 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 5 3 3 3 3 4 4 48 bp 3 2 = 4-10 yrs 3 1 3 1 1 2 4 1 2 4 2 1 2 3 3 4 2 3

15 pm 3 1 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 2 4 2 416 pm 3 1 4 4 5 4 4 3 4 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 1 1 318 pm 3 1 3 3 2 4 2 4 2 3 4 3 5 2 2 4 2 2 3 419 pm 3 2 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 3 421 pm 3 1 3 2 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 3 3 3 4 2 2 3 323 pm 3 3 1 2 4 3 1 3 4 2 1 4 1 1 5 5 5 3 1 126 pm 3 1 2 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 4 327 tr 3 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 431 tr 3 1 3 3 3 2 3 3 4 3 2 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 2 334 tr 3 1 3 4 4 5 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 2 4 2 3 4 436 tr 3 1 5 5 4 5 4 4 5 5 4 5 5 4 5 4 4 5 5 437 tr 3 4 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 439 tr 3 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 2 3 2 4 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 140 tr 3 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 341 tr 3 3 4 4 3 4 4 5 2 3 4 4 3 3 2 4 3 4 3 442 tr 3 1 4 5 4 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 5 5 4 343 tr 3 2 4 3 3 4 3 3 4 4 2 4 3 3 4 3 2 4 3 446 tr 3 1 1 4 4 3 4 2 5 4 3 5 3 2 3 4 2 4 3 447 tr 3 4 4 3 4 3 5 5 4 3 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 4 2 3

APPENDIX 6

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Count Br Des Yrs of Serv. Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q1850 tr 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 3 352 tr 3 4 2 3 3 4 4 4 5 5 2 4 2 3 3 4 3 4 4 538 tr 3 3 2 4 2 3 4 4 4 2 3 3 2 55 pm 3 1 1 1 4 2 1 3 4 4 4 5 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 161 cf 3 4 3 4 3 4 5 4 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 3 3 364 cf 3 1 4 2 4 2 2 4 4 4 5 4 2 3 2 4 4 4 3 465 cf 3 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 4 3 4 466 cf 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 1 2 1 3 3 2 3 4 1 275 cf 3 1 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 3 3 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 476 cf 3 1 2 2 4 4 2 3 3 3 3 4 2 3 3 3 4 3 2 22 bp 4 1 3 3 4 3 2 3 3 2 2 4 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 25 bp 4 1 3 2 3 2 3 3 4 3 2 3 2 3 2 2 3 3 3 37 bp 4 1 2 2 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 4 2 4

22 pm 4 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 428 tr 4 4 3 4 2 4 4 2 4 4 4 4 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 429 tr 4 3 4 4 2 4 3 4 5 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 3 3 2 332 tr 4 1 3 4 3 3 4 5 5 4 4 4 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 433 tr 4 4 1 5 3 4 3 3 4 4 3 3 5 3 3 3 3 5 1 351 tr 4 4 2 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 2 3 3 4 3 4 4 453 tr 4 4 2 2 4 4 3 2 4 3 2 4 3 3 4 4 3 4 3 454 tr 4 4 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 5 3 3 3 3 4 3 312 pm 4 1 3 4 3 4 4 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 213 pm 4 1 3 3 4 2 4 3 3 4 3 5 2 2 2 3 3 14 pm 4 1 1 4 1 4 2 1 3 4 1 1 1 3 1 1 156 km 4 2 3 4 4 5 5 3 3 2 4 5 5 3 5 4 3 3 5 360 cf 4 1 3 3 2 3 3 4 5 4 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 362 cf 4 1 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 5 5 3 4 4 3 3 5 3 563 cf 4 3 3 4 4 2 2 4 4 3 4 2 3 3 3 3 4 3 467 cf 4 1 5 3 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 5 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 568 cf 4 1 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 4 3 2 2 2 2 269 cf 4 4 4 3 2 3 4 2 4 3 2 5 2 3 2 2 2 3 2 370 cf 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 2 4 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 5 3 3 371 cf 4 1 3 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 2 4 4 4 3 3 3 4 472 cf 4 1 4 3 4 4 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 373 cf 4 1 3 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 3 5 2 2 3 2 3 4 4 4

723 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

1.02 1.01 0.99 1.04 1.05 0.87 0.93 0.87 1.00 0.79 1.08 0.82 0.91 0.75 0.87 0.93 1.02 0.97-0.33 -0.69 -0.85 -0.59 -0.47 -0.19 -1.20 -0.58 -0.35 -0.64 0.35 -0.61 0.03 -0.22 0.55 -0.77 -0.16 -0.61

CountAverage

Standard DevSkewness

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

ALL3333


creation F1 3 sharing F1 3 application F1 3 retention F1 3F2 3 F2 3 F2 3 F2 3F3 3 F3 3 F3 3 F3 3F4 4 F4 3 F4 3F5 3

CREATIONSHARING

APPLICATIONRETENTION

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q19 Q20 Q21 Q22 Q23 Q24 Q25 Q26 Q27 Q28 Q29 Q30 Q31 Q32 Q33 Q34 Q35 Q36 Q37 Q38 Q39 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q443 3 2 3 2 1 1 3 1 2 2 3 3 1 3 1 1 2 1 3 3 1 3 1 4 33 3 2 4 4 4 2 2 3 2 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 4 3 3 4 2 3 3 3 33 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 2 2 4 2 3 2 3 4 4 2 4 4 4 32 4 2 3 2 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 4 3 4 4 2 2 3 2 3 2 3 32 4 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 3 4 2 3 2 2 4 3 4 2 4 4 4 41 2 1 2 3 1 2 4 4 4 3 2 3 2 3 3 1 2 3 4 4 2 3 3 4 12 5 3 5 4 4 1 4 2 1 4 4 1 3 5 4 2 4 2 4 4 2 5 2 5 32 2 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 2 2 3 4 2 4 3 3 23 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 2 4 4 2 4 3 4 4 2 4 4 4 33 2 4 4 4 4 2 4 2 2 3 4 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 3 4 2 3 4 4 22 1 2 4 2 2 3 4 2 3 2 3 4 2 3 3 2 1 2 4 4 3 4 4 3 13 4 3 5 4 3 3 4 3 1 2 3 3 4 4 4 5 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 34 3 3 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 2 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 5 4 4 34 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 2 3 5 4 4 4 2 4 3 4 32 4 4 4 3 2 4 4 3 2 4 3 5 5 5 5 3 3 1 1 5 3 5 3 5 42 2 2 3 2 4 4 4 3 2 3 4 3 3 2 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 4 3 3 24 4 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 4 4 3 41 5 1 3 1 3 3 5 3 2 1 2 1 3 4 4 2 2 1 1 4 4 2 3 3 54 2 2 4 2 4 4 4 2 2 2 2 4 2 3 2 2 2 4 2 4 2 4 4 4 31 1 1 4 1 2 2 3 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 3 2 4 3 1 2 1 2 22 2 4 3 4 4 3 4 3 2 4 3 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 4 2 2 2 3 23 3 4 4 3 3 4 4 2 3 4 4 4 4 2 2 3 4 4 2 4 4 4 31 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 2 1 3 2 1 1 2 4 2 3 2 3 11 5 2 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 11 3 1 3 4 2 3 4 1 2 2 3 4 3 4 4 2 3 2 2 4 2 4 3 3 43 4 3 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 4 4 4 22 4 1 5 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 14 4 3 4 4 3 4 5 4 4 2 5 4 4 4 4 2 5 4 4 4 3 4 4 5 35 4 4 4 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 22 4 2 4 4 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 4 2 21 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 13 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 32 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 3 4 4 3 2 3 25 4 4 5 4 3 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 4 43 4 2 4 4 2 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 4 3 4 4 3 12 3 1 4 4 2 2 3 4 1 4 4 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 2 4 1 3 2 2 22 3 2 4 4 3 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 2 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 4 4 2 1

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q19 Q20 Q21 Q22 Q23 Q24 Q25 Q26 Q27 Q28 Q29 Q30 Q31 Q32 Q33 Q34 Q35 Q36 Q37 Q38 Q39 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q442 2 3 4 2 2 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 4 3 3 3 3 2 2 23 4 3 5 3 4 4 3 3 2 2 3 4 3 2 3 3 3 2 2 4 3 2 4 3 13 1 4 3 1 3 3 3 2 3 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 3 1 21 1 1 3 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 4 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 3 2 4 2 2 23 4 3 4 4 4 3 4 3 2 4 4 4 3 4 5 2 4 4 3 4 3 4 5 4 34 4 2 2 4 4 4 2 2 2 4 4 4 2 5 2 4 2 2 4 4 4 2 2 4 41 2 4 4 3 4 3 3 4 4 2 3 3 3 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 11 1 2 3 3 1 3 3 2 1 2 3 2 5 3 4 3 3 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 14 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 42 2 3 2 2 3 4 2 2 2 4 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 23 3 2 3 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 4 3 2 3 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 3 2 4 32 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 33 3 2 4 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 4 4 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 24 4 3 4 4 3 3 4 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 54 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 4 4 4 3 4 4 2 4 2 4 51 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 4 3 3 2 4 4 4 2 3 5 4 2 3 3 3 13 4 3 3 4 3 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 21 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 1 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 4 1 3 4 3 13 4 3 4 3 4 4 3 3 3 2 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 4 4 13 3 2 4 3 4 3 3 4 3 3 4 3 4 2 2 2 4 2 2 4 3 3 2 3 13 3 4 4 3 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 4 3 4 2 4 24 2 4 4 3 2 4 2 3 4 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 4 4 3 22 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 4 2 3 21 3 1 1 4 2 1 4 3 1 1 4 3 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 3 2 3 1 1 12 2 1 3 1 1 4 2 2 3 3 2 4 2 1 1 3 4 3 2 3 1 5 2 1 22 3 3 3 2 3 5 4 1 1 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 34 5 3 4 4 4 3 4 4 2 0 5 3 2 3 2 3 4 4 2 4 4 5 5 5 23 4 2 4 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 2 4 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 4 3 3 44 3 3 5 3 3 3 4 4 4 5 5 4 3 4 4 3 3 2 3 5 4 5 5 4 52 3 1 2 2 3 4 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 1 3 3 2 2 4 3 4 3 2 22 3 2 4 4 3 2 4 2 3 2 2 4 3 1 2 3 4 4 2 3 2 3 2 3 33 4 2 4 5 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 2 3 4 3 4 2 3 3 3 3 3 22 4 3 4 4 3 4 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 41 1 1 4 3 1 3 2 2 2 2 3 4 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 4 3 2 3 3 15 3 3 4 3 4 2 3 2 2 3 4 3 4 4 4 2 3 5 4 4 5 5 4 5 4

3 3 2 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 21.11 1.08 0.94 0.89 1.04 1.00 0.97 0.88 0.97 1.01 1.05 0.92 0.81 1.02 1.02 1.14 0.95 1.06 1.02 1.00 0.70 0.91 0.91 1.05 1.00 1.160.27 -0.37 -0.07 -0.98 -0.59 -0.38 -0.50 -0.61 -0.27 -0.01 -0.39 -0.28 -0.68 -0.01 0.06 0.04 0.23 -0.01 0.17 -0.18 -1.15 0.21 -0.36 -0.16 -0.47 0.46

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q45 Q46 Q47 Q48 Q49 Q50 Q51 Q52 Q53 Q54 Q55 Q56 Q57 Q58 Q59 Q601 3 1 1 2 3 4 4 1 1 3 1 2 2 3 12 3 4 3 2 2 3 4 2 2 3 2 3 4 3 44 3 4 4 2 4 3 4 1 4 4 1 4 4 4 52 3 4 4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 44 3 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 2 4 2 2 2 2 43 2 4 4 2 3 4 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 15 3 4 4 4 3 2 5 4 1 2 2 4 1 5 53 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 2 2 3 2 3 3 3 44 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 2 4 53 2 4 4 3 4 2 4 2 2 2 2 3 2 4 42 2 4 4 3 2 1 5 2 2 3 2 4 4 2 52 3 3 4 2 1 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 4 1 44 4 3 3 4 4 4 2 2 3 4 4 44 4 3 3 4 4 3 4 41 3 2 2 1 1 5 5 1 1 5 1 1 5 3 33 3 4 3 3 2 2 4 2 3 3 2 3 4 3 53 4 2 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 2 3 4 3 2 43 2 2 2 2 1 1 5 1 1 4 1 1 3 1 54 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 51 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 2 3 2 1 1 52 2 4 4 4 2 3 4 1 2 4 1 1 3 3 4 4 4 4 2 4 2 4 2 5

2 2 4 4 3 2 3 4 1 1 4 1 3 3 1 51 3 5 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 1 5 2 53 2 3 4 3 1 3 4 2 4 4 3 2 4 3 54 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 3 4 54 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 42 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 44 4 5 5 5 5 3 5 3 4 4 3 4 4 3 52 2 4 4 4 2 2 4 2 2 4 2 2 4 2 41 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 1 4 43 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 43 3 4 3 3 2 2 3 1 2 4 1 2 3 3 43 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 3 3 3 4 42 2 4 3 2 3 1 4 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 52 4 4 4 2 1 4 4 2 2 2 2 4 3 2 41 3 4 4 3 2 2 4 1 4 4 2 4 3 4 5

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q45 Q46 Q47 Q48 Q49 Q50 Q51 Q52 Q53 Q54 Q55 Q56 Q57 Q58 Q59 Q603 4 3 3 3 2 4 4 4 4 3 2 4 3 2 22 2 2 2 2 1 3 4 3 4 2 1 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 1 1 3 2 3 1 4

2 2 1 2 2 1 2 4 2 1 3 2 4 4 3 44 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 1 3 4 4 4 5 5 42 4 4 4 3 4 2 4 5 2 2 3 4 4 5 31 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 2 3 1 22 3 2 3 3 3 1 2 2 3 1 3 2 3 1 14 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 3 3 3 4 3 2 53 3 2 2 2 4 2 3 2 2 2 3 4 3 4 44 3 2 2 2 3 4 4 1 2 3 2 2 2 3 52 3 3 4 2 2 4 3 2 2 4 2 3 3 43 2 2 2 3 3 2 4 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 4 5 3 5 5

3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 24 3 4 4 3 3 3 4 2 4 5 2 3 2 4 54 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 53 2 5 5 3 2 2 5 5 3 1 1 3 5 2 42 2 2 2 2 1 3 4 3 4 2 2 2 3 3 21 3 1 1 3 3 2 3 2 3 2 2 3 3 1 22 3 4 3 3 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 3 2 4 42 2 4 4 2 2 2 4 2 2 2 4 2 4 4 4 3 4 1 4 1 1 3 4

1 1 4 3 2 2 3 4 2 2 1 2 2 3 3 42 4 1 1 4 1 5 3 2 1 1 4 4 1 52 2 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 1 33 3 3 4 4 5 4 2 2 3 4 4 3 4 5 34 3 4 4 2 3 3 4 2 3 2 3 3 2 25 5 4 4 4 3 5 5 3 4 3 3 4 4 3 42 2 3 3 4 1 2 5 2 3 3 2 2 3 2 34 2 1 2 3 2 1 4 2 3 3 2 3 3 2 43 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 52 4 4 4 4 2 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 2 3 1 4 1 4 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 43 4 3 3 3 4 4 4 5 3 4 2 3 2 3 5

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 41.08 0.91 1.09 1.01 0.95 1.15 1.15 0.84 1.14 1.03 0.95 0.93 1.03 1.00 1.16 1.090.07 -0.13 -0.81 -0.85 -0.28 -0.05 -0.25 -1.29 0.57 -0.12 -0.43 0.31 -0.48 -0.40 -0.06 -1.18

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Count Branch Designation Years of Service Q1 Q2 Q3 Q456 km 4 2 3 4 4 5



creation F1 5 sharing F1F2 4 F2F3 3 F3F4 5F5 3

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q135 3 3 2 4 5 5 3 5

2 applicationF1 1 retention F1 24 F2 3 F2 22 F3 3 F3 4

F4 4 F4 3

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 Q19 Q20 Q21 Q224 3 3 5 3 2 2 1 3

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q23 Q24 Q25 Q26 Q27 Q28 Q29 Q30 Q311 1 4 2 2 3 3 2 4

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q32 Q33 Q34 Q35 Q36 Q37 Q38 Q39 Q402 1 1 3 4 3 2 3 1

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q41 Q42 Q43 Q44 Q45 Q46 Q47 Q48 Q495 2 1 2 2 4 1 1 4

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q50 Q51 Q52 Q53 Q54 Q55 Q56 Q57 Q581 5 3 2 1 1 4 4

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q59 Q601 5

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Count Branch Designation Years of Service Q1 Q2 Q312 pm (micheal) 0 1 3 4 013 pm(hanlie) 0 1 3 3 414 pm (AB) 0 0 1 4 125 pm 1 1 4 4 410 pm 2 1 2 4 317 pm 2 3 4 4 220 pm 2 1 1 3 324 pm 2 1 5 5 115 pm 3 1 4 4 416 pm 3 1 4 4 518 pm 3 1 3 3 219 pm 3 2 3 4 021 pm 3 1 3 2 023 pm 3 3 1 2 426 pm 3 1 2 3 322 pm 4 3 3 3 055 pm 3 1 1 1 4

Count 17Average 3 3 2Standard Dev 1.25 1.00 1.73Skewness -0.15 -0.83 -0.21


average F1 3F2 3F3 4F4 2F5 2F6 4F7 2F8 2F9 3F10 3F11 3F12 1F13 2F14 2

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

F15 2F16 3


COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q120 3 4 4 0 0 3 2 22 4 3 3 4 3 5 0 20 4 2 0 1 3 4 1 14 5 5 4 3 3 4 3 34 3 3 4 3 4 4 2 32 4 4 4 2 4 4 2 44 2 3 4 4 4 5 3 22 3 1 1 2 2 5 1 14 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 44 4 3 4 2 2 2 2 34 2 4 2 3 4 3 5 24 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 43 3 4 4 4 4 5 3 33 1 3 4 2 1 4 1 12 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 34 0 4 4 4 4 4 3 02 1 3 4 4 4 5 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 4 2 21.38 1.36 0.97 1.22 1.19 1.22 0.86 1.33 1.17

-0.94 -0.60 -0.53 -1.94 -0.89 -1.42 -0.92 0.07 -0.26

COPYRIG

HT U

CT


F4 3 F4 2

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 Q19 Q20 Q212 2 2 2 2 2 4 2 00 2 2 3 3 0 2 4 31 3 0 1 1 1 1 3 13 2 2 4 3 3 3 3 23 4 2 4 2 3 2 4 24 3 2 2 2 4 2 4 23 4 3 2 3 2 1 2 12 3 1 4 4 4 2 5 33 4 2 4 2 4 4 2 22 2 2 1 1 3 1 1 12 4 2 2 3 4 2 2 44 4 0 0 3 4 3 3 43 4 2 2 3 3 1 2 25 5 5 3 1 1 1 5 23 3 3 2 4 3 1 3 10 0 0 4 4 4 4 4 32 2 3 2 2 1 1 1 1

2 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 21.33 1.22 1.25 1.23 1.01 1.31 1.14 1.25 1.12

-0.29 -0.69 0.34 -0.15 -0.09 -0.70 0.72 0.12 0.30

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q22 Q23 Q24 Q25 Q26 Q27 Q28 Q29 Q304 4 3 2 4 2 0 3 44 4 3 4 4 4 0 4 31 4 2 1 4 3 1 1 44 4 4 2 2 3 2 3 33 2 3 3 4 3 3 3 33 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 42 3 1 2 4 4 4 3 25 4 4 1 4 2 1 4 44 2 4 4 4 2 2 2 24 1 2 2 3 1 1 1 13 4 4 3 4 3 2 4 34 3 3 4 4 2 0 3 43 3 3 2 3 3 0 3 31 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 23 4 2 3 4 1 2 2 34 4 3 0 0 0 0 3 03 1 1 2 2 1 2 1

3 3 3 2 3 2 1 3 31.09 1.17 1.11 1.18 1.27 1.09 1.16 1.00 1.21

-0.85 -0.79 -0.05 0.00 -1.29 -0.20 0.71 -0.27 -0.79

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q31 Q32 Q33 Q34 Q35 Q36 Q37 Q38 Q393 2 2 3 3 0 2 2 42 0 2 2 2 2 2 3 43 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 32 2 3 3 2 4 3 3 43 2 4 3 4 4 2 2 33 4 2 3 2 2 4 3 43 2 3 3 1 2 3 4 41 3 5 4 2 4 2 4 44 2 3 2 2 2 4 2 42 1 2 1 1 3 2 4 32 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 44 4 4 0 2 2 3 4 43 2 1 3 2 1 1 2 43 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 3 4 4 2 3 2 2 40 4 3 3 0 0 0 0 44 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 3

3 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 41.10 1.16 1.11 1.11 0.88 1.27 1.05 1.23 0.80

-0.91 -0.11 0.50 -0.50 0.38 0.21 0.10 -0.23 -2.44

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q44 Q45 Q46 Q47 Q480 4 3 0 2 2 2 4 40 0 2 3 2 0 2 4 42 3 1 1 1 1 1 4 32 3 3 3 3 2 3 4 32 3 2 3 3 2 3 4 42 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 42 3 3 4 1 3 2 4 42 5 2 5 3 5 3 4 42 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 41 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 12 2 2 3 2 2 2 4 42 4 4 4 3 0 4 4 42 3 2 3 1 2 2 4 41 2 1 1 1 1 3 5 32 4 3 3 4 3 2 3 44 4 3 3 5 0 0 5 02 4 2 2 2 2 2 1 2

2 3 2 3 2 2 2 4 30.90 1.19 1.01 1.29 1.18 1.46 1.05 1.10 1.21

-0.05 -1.15 0.09 -0.63 0.47 0.41 -0.30 -1.86 -1.83

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q49 Q50 Q51 Q52 Q53 Q54 Q55 Q56 Q572 2 2 4 0 0 0 2 24 3 0 4 1 0 4 1 12 2 3 4 2 2 1 2 22 2 3 4 2 2 3 2 33 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 43 4 4 4 4 2 4 2 22 0 3 4 2 2 2 1 14 3 2 5 4 1 2 2 44 4 4 4 2 2 3 3 30 3 1 1 1 2 3 2 14 2 3 4 1 2 4 1 10 2 0 4 0 2 4 2 03 2 3 4 1 1 4 1 31 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 13 1 3 4 2 4 4 3 20 3 0 5 0 0 0 0 02 1 2 4 2 1 3 2 4

2 2 2 4 2 2 3 2 21.40 1.09 1.33 0.86 1.22 1.06 1.36 0.83 1.32

-0.44 -0.20 -0.54 -2.45 0.55 0.27 -0.92 -0.24 0.18

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q58 Q59 Q602 0 40 3 43 3 44 3 43 3 42 2 41 1 11 5 52 2 51 0 53 3 40 0 53 1 55 2 54 3 50 0 54 3 4

2 2 41.56 1.46 0.990.00 0.00 -2.45

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Count Branch Designation Years of Service Q1 Q2 Q31 bp 1 1 3 3 46 bp 2 1 4 4 44 bp 3 1 3 3 28 bp 3 2 3 1 32 bp 4 1 3 3 45 bp 4 1 3 2 37 bp 4 1 2 2 3

57 bp 2 1 3 4 458 bp 2 1 3 5 359 bp 2 1 3 5 1

Count 10Average 3 3 3Standard Dev 0.47 1.32 0.99Skewness 0.00 -0.09 -1.08




COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q121 1 3 3 2 1 5 3 34 3 3 4 4 2 4 3 43 4 4 4 4 3 4 5 31 1 2 4 1 2 4 2 13 2 3 3 2 2 4 3 32 3 3 4 3 2 3 2 32 2 3 3 3 2 3 2 34 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 34 3 3 4 4 3 5 3 44 5 3 2 3 2 4 3 2

3 3 3 3 3 2 4 3 31.23 1.25 0.47 0.70 0.99 0.63 0.67 0.88 0.88

-0.43 0.28 0.00 -0.78 -0.61 -0.13 0.00 1.46 -1.02


F4 3 F4 3

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 Q19 Q20 Q211 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 23 3 2 4 4 3 3 4 33 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 32 3 3 4 2 3 1 5 12 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 22 2 3 3 3 3 2 2 33 3 3 4 2 4 3 3 22 3 2 4 4 4 4 3 34 4 3 3 4 4 4 44 3 2 4 4 4 2 4 4

3 3 2 4 3 3 3 4 30.97 0.47 0.53 0.52 0.79 0.82 0.99 0.85 0.950.11 0.00 0.27 -0.48 -0.41 -0.69 -0.61 0.00 -0.23

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q22 Q23 Q24 Q25 Q26 Q27 Q28 Q29 Q303 2 1 1 3 1 2 2 34 3 4 4 4 3 4 4 44 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 43 1 3 3 5 3 2 1 23 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 43 3 2 2 3 2 2 2 34 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 24 4 4 4 3 3 34 3 4 4 4 4 34 3 2 4 4 3 2 4 3

4 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 30.52 0.92 1.06 1.05 0.73 0.88 0.73 1.14 0.74

-0.48 -0.60 0.04 -0.55 1.01 -0.21 1.01 -0.09 -0.17

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q31 Q32 Q33 Q34 Q35 Q36 Q37 Q38 Q393 1 3 1 1 2 1 3 32 2 4 2 3 2 3 4 43 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 31 3 4 4 2 2 1 1 43 2 3 2 2 2 2 3 33 2 3 3 2 2 3 3 34 4 3 3 2 2 2 3 32 3 4 4 4 4 3 44 3 2 3 5 4 4 45 5 5 5 3 3 1 1 5

3 3 4 3 3 3 2 3 41.15 1.20 0.71 1.20 0.85 1.01 1.16 1.03 0.700.00 0.54 1.18 0.23 0.00 2.12 0.34 -1.03 0.78

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q44 Q45 Q46 Q47 Q481 3 1 4 3 1 3 1 12 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 43 4 4 3 4 3 4 2 34 2 3 3 5 3 2 2 22 3 2 4 3 4 3 2 23 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 42 3 2 2 2 3 2 2 23 5 4 4 3 4 4 3 32 4 3 4 3 4 4 33 5 3 5 4 1 3 2 2

3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 30.85 0.97 0.99 0.84 0.82 1.20 0.71 0.97 0.970.00 0.11 -0.61 -0.39 0.81 -0.74 0.00 0.45 0.11

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q49 Q50 Q51 Q52 Q53 Q54 Q55 Q56 Q572 3 4 4 1 1 3 1 22 4 3 4 1 4 4 1 43 3 4 4 3 3 2 3 42 1 1 5 1 1 4 1 12 3 4 4 1 2 3 2 22 2 4 3 2 2 4 2 33 3 2 4 3 3 3 2 2

4 4 4 2 2 33 4 4 31 1 5 5 1 1 5 1 1

2 3 4 4 2 2 3 2 20.67 1.14 1.18 0.67 0.92 1.13 1.00 0.71 1.13

-0.25 -0.66 -1.27 0.00 1.00 0.49 0.11 0.61 0.18

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Q58 Q59 Q602 3 14 4 53 2 43 1 52 3 53 43 2 44 4 44 45 3 3

3 3 40.95 1.04 1.200.23 -0.39 -1.71

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

APPENDIX 5 – DEAAT Senior Management Interviews

Interview 1 Mr. P Beets, Director, Transport Administration

[Q1] What do you understand by knowledge management?

KM is not different from the current policies of getting know-how and transferral of that knowledge downward in cascade fashion.

[Q2] Does your branch have a policy, strategy, goal, etc., for knowledge management?

refer to [Q1]

[Q3] Are your strategic objectives aligned with your knowledge management objectives? Knowledge management would facilitate the achievement of the branch’s strategic objectives.

[Q4] Do your employees have skills to transform data into meaningful information? There are two extremes to knowledge: those with the experiential knowledge but no qualifications and the newly qualified who have no experiential knowledge. There is a need to accelerate the process to be effective. Employees have the ability to transform data into meaningful information but a considerable portion is purely functional.

[Q5] What role does the knowledge, which is present within your branch or function play in creating the department’s organization competencies? Education and training enjoys a good status. Personnel are being developed to become more client service oriented

[Q6] Have you already made your own analysis of the existing knowledge and knowledge processes (i.e., identifying, acquiring, developing, sharing, retaining, and retrieving knowledge) in your branch? The branch has recently undergone a skills audit and a SWOT analysis. The six directors within the branch are measured on a quarterly basis

[Q7] In which areas of knowledge management is your branch particularly strong? The use and application of knowledge are the branches strong points.

[Q8] Where do you see the nuclei of knowledge management in your department?

There are nuclei of knowledge that lies mainly in the line function of the particular department.

[Q9] Who are the promoters or champions of knowledge management? There are a number of individuals who champion the management of knowledge within the branch.

[Q10] What or who are the inhibitors of knowledge management? There are many knowledgeable people in the branch however the newly appointed staff do not have the skills. The years following the transition saw many experienced personnel leave the department either for better job opportunities or taking the package. The exodus had a detrimental effect on the department and it had to re-build itself. Management is of the opinion that the branch is still suffering.

[Q11] In which knowledge management processes (creation, sharing, application or retention/retrieval) do you see your main problems?

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Creation and sharing of knowledge are perceived to be the main problems in the admin section.

[Q12] Do you know the internal experts in your department and can you contact them easily? Experts within the department are easily contactable.

[Q13] Do you know what projects are in progress in your department at the moment? Management has good information of current major projects within the DEAAT.

[Q14] What information and communications technologies are available to support the different knowledge management processes? The web, posters, flyersand the internet provide good communication (or KM) mechanisms.

[Q15] What are your main ways of acquiring knowledge and which channels do you use often? Channels frequently used for acquisition of knowledge include tertiary institutions (for more formal training); internal occupational training

[Q16] Are there ways to make tacit knowledge (i.e., knowledge in people’s heads) conscious and explicit and do you believe that employees would be willing to share their knowledge if asked? If not, why do think so? Some employees will be willing to share their tacit knowledge. Others will not be so willing. Some feel intimidated if they share too much of their knowledge – they will eventually lose power and status and will no longer be needed for their knowledge. There is a culture whereby one uses their own knowledge for their own purposes only.

[Q17] Do you have best practices for the core processes in your department? There are operating procedures in place that helps minimise the reliance on tacit knowledge

Interview 2 Mr. J Slabbert, Chief Director, Property Management [Q1] What do you understand by knowledge management?

Knowledge management is inherent in the various line functions and is not necessarily a separate management issue.

[Q2] Does your branch have a policy, strategy, goal, etc., for knowledge management? There is no formal policy.

[Q3] Are your strategic objectives aligned with your knowledge management objectives? There are no explicit knowledge management objectives but it would facilitate the achievement of the branch’s strategic objectives.

[Q4] Do your employees have skills to transform data into meaningful information? Yes they do but probably not to the same degree throughout all levels.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

[Q5] What role does the knowledge, which is present within your branch or function play in

creating the department’s organization competencies? It is very important.

[Q6] Have you already made your own analysis of the existing knowledge and knowledge processes (i.e., identifying, acquiring, developing, sharing, retaining, and retrieving knowledge) in your branch? The process whereby the knowledge levels are determined is by the skills audit that was conducted in the year 2000.

[Q7] In which areas of knowledge management is your branch particularly strong? The main strength is the retention of staff with inherent knowledge. There is a good corporate culture within the department.

[Q8] Where do you see the nuclei of knowledge management in your department? There is a nucleus of knowledge within the branch. When knowledgeable people leave the branch there is an anticipated drop in level of service delivery or strategic objectives.

[Q9] Who are the promoters or champions of knowledge management? There are a few individuals who champion the pursuit of knowledge within the branch.

[Q10] What or who are the inhibitors of knowledge management? There is a need for more effective communication mechanisms. Inter-departmental co-operation is a weak point. There is a major lack of communication between certain branches and this is an area for improvement.

[Q11] In which knowledge management processes (creation, sharing, application or retention/retrieval) do you see your main problems? Creation and sharing of knowledge are the main issues in this branch.

[Q12] Do you know the internal experts in your department and can you contact them easily?

Yes, the experts within the department are known.

[Q13] Do you know what projects are in progress in your department at the moment? Yes, management attends regular forum meetings where such issues are discussed.

[Q14] What information and communications technologies are available to support the different knowledge management processes? Existing technology used to support knowledge management include the internet, media, journals and reports. Video recordings of presentations may help in spreading messages as well as concise newsletters.

[Q15] What are your main ways of acquiring knowledge and which channels do you use often?

E-mail is a convenient mechanism of exchange but some still do not acknowledge e-mail messages as being official.

[Q16] Are there ways to make tacit knowledge (i.e., knowledge in people’s heads) conscious

and explicit and do you believe that employees would be willing to share their knowledge if asked? If not, why do think so? Management stressed the importance of making tacit knowledge explicit and this is achieved mainly by reporting procedures in the line management functions. Meetings are a good mechanism but this method is sometimes not convenient from a logistical perspective.

[Q17] Do you have best practices for the core processes in your department?

There are operating procedures in place.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Interview 3 Mr J Koeglenberg, Director, Motor Transport / Garage [Q1] What do you understand by knowledge management?

Management has heard of knowledge management – perceives it to be the knowledge a manager has and how s/he filters it down to the subordinates.

[Q2] Does your branch have a policy, strategy, goal, etc., for knowledge management? There is no formal policy. There are no knowledge goals set for the department but how does one do this?

[Q3] Are your strategic objectives aligned with your knowledge management objectives? Management agrees that knowledge management will help reach its department’s strategic objectives.

[Q4] Do your employees have skills to transform data into meaningful information? The impression is that the staff capabilities need to be enhanced.

[Q5] What role does the knowledge, which is present within your branch or function play in creating the department’s organization competencies? Transport plays a major role in the functioning of other departments. It cannot blame other departments for the inefficient provision of transport. It does not itself have a direct role in the delivery of service to the citizens of the Western Cape.

[Q6] Have you already made your own analysis of the existing knowledge and knowledge processes (i.e., identifying, acquiring, developing, sharing, retaining, and retrieving knowledge) in your branch? A knowledge management assessment has not been conducted it the department but there is a keen interest for it.

[Q7] In which areas of knowledge management is your branch particularly strong? The department is particularly strong in sharing of information and knowledge. There is a firmly held management belief that sharing enables and empowers the more that 100 employees to accomplish their tasks.

[Q8] Where do you see the nuclei of knowledge management in your department? There is a nucleus of knowledge. There is a requirement to build on computer literacy. Staff are willing to share knowledge but there is a reliance on the people with existing knowledge.

[Q9] Who are the promoters or champions of knowledge management? There are no current champions of knowledge management – it is inherent in the structure. There is a need for a formalised approach to knowledge management.

[Q10] What or who are the inhibitors of knowledge management?

There is a cross spectrum of employees and no evidence of social inhibitors to knowledge management. Most staff are young and there is not much loss of knowledge due to retirement. The present working environment is such that staff do not have time to prepare – one of the inhibitors to knowledge management. Staff continually find themselves ‘fire-fighting’.

[Q11] In which knowledge management processes (creation, sharing, application or retention/retrieval) do you see your main problems? The introduction of new ideas is a problem even with those developed internally. As with affirmative action, the introduction of new recruits there is an initial lack of knowledge as they were not previously exposed to or engaged with the processes. Work goals have to be met by the more experienced staff. Knowledge issues presents itself in the form of the job specifications – more experienced people are required.


COPYRIG

HT U

CT

The internal experts within the branch are known. There is potential to harm the operational effectiveness if these people leave the organisation.

[Q13] Do you know what projects are in progress in your department at the moment?

There is no structured process of knowledge management but there are management meetings held on a 6-weekly basis. There is a perception that if held monthly attendance is likely to drop.

Not all the projects within the DEAAT are known – but there is an interest. This type of information generally takes time to filter through (approximately 3 months to become aware).

[Q14] What information and communications technologies are available to support the

different knowledge management processes?

There are faster ways of communicating such as a concise regularly distributed newsletter. IT infrastructure needs to be improved to enhance the speed of the present applications. People will accept changes as long as they run effectively.


Current ways of acquiring knowledge is via presentations that subsequently are transferred to lower staff levels


and explicit and do you believe that employees would be willing to share their knowledge if asked? If not, why do think so? Staff will be willing to share their tacit knowledge if asked to. There is a perception that people have moved away from becoming experts and are more willing to share their knowledge. There is an emphasis on teamwork because of the nature of the work. Documentation can be more concise an in the form of work instructions.


Staff are aware of the branch’s core processes. Staff are taken on workshops where they are exposed to the functioning of other departments via presentations. This also happens on an interdepartmental level. A framework for knowledge management is needed. There is a strong synergy and vision within the DEAAT.

Interview 4 Mr S Snyman, Director, Property Planning & Development [Q1] What do you understand by knowledge management?

Management has rubbed shoulders with knowledge management but believes it to be inherent in the current structures built up over a number of years


There is no present policy that covers knowledge management in the department. [Q3] Are your strategic objectives aligned with your knowledge management objectives?

It is believed that knowledge management will enable the branch to achieve it strategic objectives. Strategic objectives are not necessarily aligned with the knowledge management processes in that databases are not shared among departments. Each has its own separate system.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

[Q4] Do your employees have skills to transform data into meaningful information? Yes.

[Q5] What role does the knowledge, which is present within your branch or function play in creating the department’s organization competencies?

The type of work requires specialised knowledge. [Q6] Have you already made your own analysis of the existing knowledge and knowledge

processes (i.e., identifying, acquiring, developing, sharing, retaining, and retrieving knowledge) in your branch? refer to [Q2]

[Q7] In which areas of knowledge management is your branch particularly strong?

The department is strong in the application of knowledge. The type of knowledge required by this department cannot be taught over a relatively short period.


There are nuclei of knowledge that are being managed indirectly without any formalised management approach.

[Q9] Who are the promoters or champions of knowledge management?

There are a few (about 3) knowledge champions within the department (including the interviewee).


The transfer of knowledge is inhibited by the bureaucratic structure of the organisation. Communication lines are poorly designed and the messages cannot be effectively because of ‘red-tape’ issues.

[Q11] In which knowledge management processes (creation, sharing, application or retention/retrieval) do you see your main problems? refer to [Q3]


Yes. [Q13] Do you know what projects are in progress in your department at the moment?

Management is aware of the high profile projects within the DEAAT but within the Property Management branch all the progress on projects taking place are known. The on-goings in certain branches are only sometimes read about in the newspaper.


different knowledge management processes? Internet, e-mail, media, journals and reports, meetings, presentations, etc.


Routes for gaining knowledge are mostly external to the organisation.

[Q16] Are there ways to make tacit knowledge (i.e., knowledge in people’s heads) conscious and explicit and do you believe that employees would be willing to share their knowledge if asked? If not, why do think so? There is a cultural problem within the organisation, that colleagues withhold knowledge especially in the areas outside of one’s own knowledge base.


There are SOPs.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Interview 5 Mr B Veldman, Chief Director, Infrastructure [Q1] What do you understand by knowledge management?

It was previously understood that intellectual and knowledge-based assets are the staff and processes, meetings, management systems and interactions.

[Q2] Does your branch have a policy, strategy, goal, etc., for knowledge management? Knowledge pools are formalised and inherent in the processes. Knowledge is taken into account when drawing up the strategy for the branch. There is the perception that knowledge management is making too much of something that is not special.

[Q3] Are your strategic objectives aligned with your knowledge management objectives?

The department cannot perform without tapping into knowledge (via experience and intellect). Therefore, enhancement of knowledge management will facilitate the achievement of the branch’s strategic objectives.

[Q4] Do your employees have skills to transform data into meaningful information?

Yes. [Q5] What role does the knowledge, which is present within your branch or function play in

creating the department’s organization competencies? There is a loss of knowledge when on leaves and getting skilled staff in the public

sector is not easy. [Q6] Have you already made your own analysis of the existing knowledge and knowledge

processes (i.e., identifying, acquiring, developing, sharing, retaining, and retrieving knowledge) in your branch? ?


Processes are shared constantly and there is strength in retention of knowledge. Staff always discuss and debate strategies. The branch is very much execution based and output-driven. The branch is doing well in terms of sharing knowledge.


There is a nucleus of knowledge and the branch is currently working on creation of knowledge.


Knowledge champions are inherent in the systems.

[Q10] What or who are the inhibitors of knowledge management? Environmental factors play a part in the inhibition of knowledge management. Examples include economic issues such as the inability to remunerate skilled staff with salaries competitive to the private sector. Affirmative action also has a role to play and impinges on the business.

[Q11] In which knowledge management processes (creation, sharing, application or retention/retrieval) do you see your main problems? The issues are normal inefficiencies (time taken to do things) and the bureaucratic structure.


Yes.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT


The branch is very knowledge centric and it is essential to the type of work conducted. Inter-departmental co-operation could improve. There are mechanisms in place and there are efforts towards achieving this. Senior managers know the projects the other branches but should improve the transfer of this information down the hierarchy. There are senior management meetings where strategies are discussed and everyone has the opportunity to present their views and help one another.

[Q14] What information and communications technologies are available to support the different knowledge management processes? Internet, e-mail, media, journals and reports, meetings, presentations, etc.


Knowledge is acquired through continuous education. Basic formal education is a pre-requisite, but there are other established mechanisms for on-going training such as fact-finding missions overseas etc. Internal training is more in the form of knowledge transfer from more experienced staff.

[Q16] Are there ways to make tacit knowledge (i.e., knowledge in people’s heads) conscious and explicit and do you believe that employees would be willing to share their knowledge if asked? If not, why do think so? Tacit knowledge will be shared if staff are asked as one cannot function if knowledge is not used consciously.


Standard operating procedures are in place but any individual that leaves will be missed. However, the branch continues to function but with a lot more effort.

Interview 6 Mr B J du Plessis, Director, Personnel and Administration


Knowledge management is inherent in the processes. .

[Q2] Does your branch have a policy, strategy, goal, etc., for knowledge management? Although all branches may not be aware, there are policies to support the information technology and operations plans, but there is no policy in place yet for information.

[Q3] Are your strategic objectives aligned with your knowledge management objectives? The strategic objectives are aligned with those of knowledge management goals but it is not formalised. There is room for improvement in this area. Knowledge is taken into account when strategies are discussed – there main objective being to satisfy the internal clients by streamlining their application of knowledge.


Although an analysis of the existing knowledge has not been conducted it was perceived that not all employees have the ability to transform data into meaningful information. Whilst more senior staff are the able, there are portions of the clerical staff that do not have the ability.


creating the department’s organization competencies? There is a loss of knowledge when on leaves and getting skilled staff in the public

sector is not easy.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

[Q6] Have you already made your own analysis of the existing knowledge and knowledge processes (i.e., identifying, acquiring, developing, sharing, retaining, and retrieving knowledge) in your branch? refer to [Q4]


Areas in which the department is particularly strong are in the retention and application of knowledge.


There are nuclei of knowledge within the department, with each section having at least one or two databases that can be used for knowledge management purposes.

[Q9] Who are the promoters or champions of knowledge management? There are at least 3 people that can be identified as knowledge champions within the department


Inhibitors to knowledge management include the short times allowed to reach deadlines. There is not enough staff to meet the demands of the DEAAT.

[Q11] In which knowledge management processes (creation, sharing, application or retention/retrieval) do you see your main problems? Issues that have implications on knowledge management include budget constraints, centralisation of IT, the bureaucratic nature of the DEAAT and lack of management support. The main problems occur in the areas of creation and application of knowledge. IT resources are not always accessible.



Even though the projects in other branches are known via established forums, interdepartmental co-operation is a problem.


different knowledge management processes? There is a wide range of supporting technologies available to support the knowledge management processes, namely, PCs, the internet, databases, the intranet etc.


The main means of acquiring knowledge is via current literature and working groups [Q16] Are there ways to make tacit knowledge (i.e., knowledge in people’s heads) conscious

and explicit and do you believe that employees would be willing to share their knowledge if asked? If not, why do think so? There are ways in which tacit knowledge can be made explicit for example there are standard operating procedures for all types of jobs. Manuals and handbooks have been set-up. It is believed that staff will be willing to share their knowledge if asked.


There are established best practices there is close collaboration amongst the nine provincial departments. Communities of practice have also been established which allows for the sharing of information. These are also supported by the code of conduct of the DEAAT.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Interview 7 Mr J Paulse, Director, Agricultural Training [Q1] What do you understand by knowledge management?

Management’s broad understanding of knowledge management is the acquisition and transfer of knowledge and then to create systems to implement this knowledge. .

[Q2] Does your branch have a policy, strategy, goal, etc., for knowledge management? Since agriculture is one of the economic drivers of the province it is imperative that the players receive a high standard of training as possible. There is no explicit knowledge management policy.


There is no explicit knowledge management policy. The current strategy revolves around the transfer of agricultural knowledge to the greater Western Cape area and the rest of Africa. To do this one has to use different systems, e.g., previous focus was on one-to-one training, but now there is a shift towards e-learning to make the knowledge base more accessible.


The employees do, to a large extent (due to the nature of the work), have the ability to transform data into meaningful information.


creating the department’s organization competencies? It is vital to the functioning of the branch. [Q6] Have you already made your own analysis of the existing knowledge and knowledge

processes (i.e., identifying, acquiring, developing, sharing, retaining, and retrieving knowledge) in your branch? There is continuous evaluation of staff via regular skills audits. There are work bodies that are in collaboration with other educational institutions such as the University of Stellenbosch and Cape Technikon. The students also give feedback on the course content and lecturer’s performance.


Strengths in the department include the sharing and application of knowledge. [Q8] Where do you see the nuclei of knowledge management in your department?

The lecturers are specialists in their respective fields. [Q9] Who are the promoters or champions of knowledge management?

It is perceived that the lecturing staff are more inclined than the lower level instructors to champion knowledge management initiatives. There may also be differences in the motivation to manage knowledge, with the staff in more popular/competitive fields of study being more inclined to do so.


Salaries are not competitive enough to keep certain expertise – the availability of knowledge in specific fields is market driven. The department has to rely on flexible work structures such as contract employment, consultancy work etc. Inhibitors to knowledge management include funding, technology changing at a faster rate and cultural problems where there will be unconscious resistance, such as, the move towards e-learning (would mean more work effort) and the move from Afrikaans to English medium.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

[Q11] In which knowledge management processes (creation, sharing, application or retention/retrieval) do you see your main problems? The main problems with knowledge management lie in the areas of creation and retention.


The internal experts are known and can be contacted easily.


The major projects in the department and other branches are known. This information is fed back via the management forums. These sessions are useful as the sharing of ideas creates synergy. However, there is lots of room for improvement in the area of inter-departmental co-operation. Within the Agricultural department the co-operation is good.


different knowledge management processes? The technologies used to support knowledge management processes include printed format, e-mail, internet.


There are several ways in which knowledge is acquired, namely, via meetings, direct sharing, professional bodies, communities of practice, overseas seminars, associations, internet and intranet. Electronic communication is preferred for the facilitation of knowledge transfer.

[Q16] Are there ways to make tacit knowledge (i.e., knowledge in people’s heads) conscious and explicit and do you believe that employees would be willing to share their knowledge if asked? If not, why do think so? Management felt that the staff would be willing to share their tacit knowledge if asked

to do so.

[Q17] Do you have best practices for the core processes in your department? The department also has standard operating procedures in place to facilitate knowledge transfer.

Interview 8 Dr Laurine Platzky, Deputy Director General, Business Promotion and

Tourism [Q1] What do you understand by knowledge management?

Knowledge management is building a systematic, reliable, qualitative, intuitive, an evaluation - point in direction of decision-making, iteration. Systematic means the approach to acquiring and processing various factors of the environment for strategic intervention


Not really. Conventional systems, communications systems exist. Networking informally is not a strength in government. Needs skills and systems. Not explicit.

[Q3] Are your strategic objectives aligned with your knowledge management objectives? Implicitly yes. The strategic objective "to ensure the effective marketing of tourism, trade and investment opportunities globally" – we are doing this practically. There are no knowledge management objectives in this branch

COPYRIG

HT U

CT


Yes. Most of them do have the skills.

[Q5] What role does the knowledge, which is present within your branch or function play in creating the department’s organization competencies? Big role - not explicit. Paradigms are different in different branches. The organisational competencies - policy making, legislative, programmatic: implementation of policy, financing and budget, communications and linking with other government spheres.

[Q6] Have you already made your own analysis of the existing knowledge and knowledge processes (i.e., identifying, acquiring, developing, sharing, retaining, and retrieving knowledge) in your branch? No.


Networking. [Q8] Where do you see the nuclei of knowledge management in your department?

Branch management meeting and monthly evaluation meeting and strategic review.

[Q9] Who are the promoters or champions of knowledge management? All management is champions.


The inhibitors are bureaucratic procedures.

[Q11] In which knowledge management processes (creation, sharing, application or retention/retrieval) do you see your main problems? Creation - surplus of influence, well networked - good. Sharing is a problem - turf protection, who is expert? Application – varies with confidence and experience. Retrieval - kept best staff. The intranet is not useful. Took six weeks for white paper to be published on the intranet.



Yes.

[Q14] What information and communications technologies are available to support the different knowledge management processes? ICT - website, intranet – is a disaster, it could be better. E-mail works well. IT support is uneven.

[Q15] What are your main ways of acquiring knowledge and which channels do you use often? There are problems with the time it takes to access written reports.


and explicit and do you believe that employees would be willing to share their knowledge if asked? If not, why do think so? Yes. Outside branch lacking.


Have written up some of it. Time and resources lacking - not documented. Cape gateway - support needed.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Interview 9 Francois Joubert, Director: Works (Education) [Q1] What do you understand by knowledge management?

Knowledge management - confusing it with experience, knowledge is not experience. There is no mechanism to record and transfer, when people leave they leave with their knowledge. This creates a huge vacuum as new people take a long time to get knowledge. In government specific knowledge is required.


No. We don't know how to manage knowledge [Q3] Are your strategic objectives aligned with your knowledge management objectives?

Knowledge objectives do not appear in our strategic objectives. It is not part of human resources management nor information management.


Yes


creating the department’s organization competencies? In a bureaucracy we breakdown all activities, we are like a machine….no thinking is required, do not allow creativity and initiative. Architects and engineers are expected to be creative…expect a fair level of knowledge to do the work. We employ only people with experience…following a rigid recruitment and selection process.

[Q6] Have you already made your own analysis of the existing knowledge and knowledge

processes (i.e., identifying, acquiring, developing, sharing, retaining, and retrieving knowledge) in your branch? A skills audit was done last year. I do not know the outcome. There is no conscious effort.


The needs of school children, outcome based education, school buildings and environment.

[Q8] Where do you see the nuclei of knowledge management in your department? Do not know.

[Q9] Who are the promoters or champions of knowledge management? Do not know


Learning not documented. In crisis management mode…no time to even record basic data. No time for research or collection of statistics, in acquiring new knowledge. We are reacting to crises and get a little input, no active process to acquire better solutions. I surveyed my staff and asked them to respond to the question: "Are you happy with your job?" 37% answered yes. I suppose that this would tell you how many of my staff is productive, evidently there is a correlation between job satisfaction and productivity.

[Q11] In which knowledge management processes (creation, sharing, application or retention/retrieval) do you see your main problems?

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Due to the ringfencing of responsibilities one does not know what is happening in other departments. We are in competition with other directors, so we do not share. Bureaucracies make everything routine for management purposes…machine bureaucracy…can control larger quantities of activities.

[Q12] Do you know the internal experts in your department and can you contact them easily? Yes. cannot contact them easily

[Q13] Do you know what projects are in progress in your department at the moment? No, due to the ring-fencing.


different knowledge management processes? Intranet, e-mail, e-works

[Q15] What are your main ways of acquiring knowledge and which channels do you use often? refer to [Q14]

[Q16] Are there ways to make tacit knowledge (i.e., knowledge in people’s heads) conscious and explicit and do you believe that employees would be willing to share their knowledge if asked? If not, why do think so? I think staff will be willing to share knowledge.

[Q17] Do you have best practices for the core processes in your department? There are no best practices recorded, it is in our heads. Cape Gateway and e-government: I don’t know what they are doing. I know they have a shop, and are setting up web pages, they do not affect my work. Most staff do not know who they are. I would like to use web-based technology for projects. E-Government should start with schools and hospitals. It is not involved in areas that affect ordinary people…no external focus.

Interview 10 Richard Petersen, Deputy Director General: Property Management & Works


Is KM another fad? What is KM…we have been managing knowledge without it been called KM. We had the BPR fad, is this the new one? Technology will assist in making knowledge accessible. In government we have a lot of information locked in files…paper-based…not accessible. Yes, maybe web-based is an option, though the right people should have access

[Q2] Does your branch have a policy, strategy, goal, etc., for knowledge management? Not explicit, no formal policy.


No [Q4] Do your employees have skills to transform data into meaningful information?


creating the department’s organization competencies? Has a crucial role in this Branch as we have many projects to manage


processes (i.e., identifying, acquiring, developing, sharing, retaining, and retrieving knowledge) in your branch?

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

No. [Q7] In which areas of knowledge management is your branch particularly strong?

For sharing we have a range of communications systems and structures. When it comes to use the line functions have strategies and interactions. With retention the decisions or policy are on file. These may not be communicated…there are no best practices, that one could package as case studies and place it on the intranet

[Q8] Where do you see the nuclei of knowledge management in your department? refer to [Q2]


refer to [Q2]

[Q10] What or who are the inhibitors of knowledge management? The inhibitors are bureaucratic procedures.

[Q11] In which knowledge management processes (creation, sharing, application or

retention/retrieval) do you see your main problems? There is a lack of policy resources in government. We also need systems that allow easy access.


- [Q13] Do you know what projects are in progress in your department at the moment? - [Q14] What information and communications technologies are available to support the

different knowledge management processes? -

[Q15] What are your main ways of acquiring knowledge and which channels do you use often? - [Q16] Are there ways to make tacit knowledge (i.e., knowledge in people’s heads) conscious

and explicit and do you believe that employees would be willing to share their knowledge if asked? If not, why do think so? -

[Q17] Do you have best practices for the core processes in your department? E-government and Cape Gateway: the concept is good. Need to update information electronically, computerise business processes…move away from manual processes.

Interview 11 Daryl Jacobs, Chief Director: Corporate Services [Q1] What do you understand by knowledge management?

The application of information in a particular environment or context…application is the key to understanding knowledge in the Department, e.g., legislation


No. [Q3] Are your strategic objectives aligned with your knowledge management objectives?

No [Q4] Do your employees have skills to transform data into meaningful information?

Yes, in human resources, finances and legal.

[Q5] What role does the knowledge, which is present within your branch or function play in creating the department’s organization competencies? There is an enormous amount of information generated, there are many White Papers and 1legislation form central government and this province. These are hardly

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

understood by individuals in particular Division. I have doubts whether top management understand all this information, they are bulky documents. They need to be shorter and simpler. All of it is paper-based, and it increases in quantity all the time…there is an information overload, who reads these documents? Executive summaries may help.


processes (i.e., identifying, acquiring, developing, sharing, retaining, and retrieving knowledge) in your branch? Not in a systematic way. We have done a skills audit.


In HR and Legal [Q8] Where do you see the nuclei of knowledge management in your department? Most branches have specialist capabilities.


Don’t know the champions, most likely the senior managers.


The overflow of documentation such as legislation, etc. The structure of the department shows the control mindset. The pilot study on motor vehicle registration is a far cry from doing things electronically. There are benefits from transacting electronically. There are questions on the integrity of the IT systems. 70% of Department staff are roadworkers and farmworkers with no access to a computer.

[Q11] In which knowledge management processes (creation, sharing, application or

retention/retrieval) do you see your main problems? There is little feedback from line Departments. There is a fortnightly meeting of top management where only Corporate Services reports, there are no reports from the other Branches. We have strategic planning twice a year where all the Branches get information.


-

[Q13] Do you know what projects are in progress in your department at the moment? The strategic HR function have meetings with other Branches to get to know what they do. Not all the projects but we are finding out.


different knowledge management processes? With regard to ICT we have intranet and a web site. Groupwise is extensively used. We have data warehousing system for our documents. The Corpus system is a weakness - cannot link to the internet

[Q15] What are your main ways of acquiring knowledge and which channels do you use often? -

[Q16] Are there ways to make tacit knowledge (i.e., knowledge in people’s heads) conscious and explicit and do you believe that employees would be willing to share their knowledge if asked? If not, why do think so?

-

[Q17] Do you have best practices for the core processes in your department? Cape Gateway: need a mindshift from serving the needs of the Department to serving the needs of the client. Province (PGWC) is not ready at management level as the hierarchy is a limiting factor, top management is derived from civil servants

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

who have been schooled in the old ways of managing. User based approach will not be accepted by management..

Interview 12 D. Adolph, Director: Economic Development [Q1] What do you understand by knowledge management?

Knowledge management is a big challenge for government…need good, reliable procedures in place and targeted knowledge. Whether IT or manual way. Instruments may be blockage, especially in the rural and Black township areas. There is a need to understand technology. For example in a library there is a need for the human capacity, security, infrastructure and access, people have to be literate

[Q2] Does your branch have a policy, strategy, goal, etc., for knowledge management? Not explicit. Information flow a problem.

[Q3] Are your strategic objectives aligned with your knowledge management objectives? No



creating the department’s organization competencies? Need to create database from which information can be drawn. For this skills are needed, programmes, prepare people for the knowledge economy


processes (i.e., identifying, acquiring, developing, sharing, retaining, and retrieving knowledge) in your branch?


[Q8] Where do you see the nuclei of knowledge management in your department? - [Q9] Who are the promoters or champions of knowledge management?

- [Q10] What or who are the inhibitors of knowledge management?

Need to change the internal communications such as the route forms. People is the problem. One half does not know what the other half are doing. So you will have problems with a call centre as the referral system will not work. We have eight databases in the provincial government and they don't talk to each other

[Q11] In which knowledge management processes (creation, sharing, application or retention/retrieval) do you see your main problems? Creation - reactive, not proactive in identifying knowledge needs, no dedicated staff. Transfer - learning not documented. Document tracking system not working. Need some transformation in sharing as "Departmentalism" exists. Have shared schedule file that works well. Need multiskilling. Tradition of government is to police, not outcome based, need change of attitude and management style .

[Q12] Do you know the internal experts in your department and can you contact them easily? -


COPYRIG

HT U

CT

- [Q14] What information and communications technologies are available to support the

different knowledge management processes? With regard to ICT we have intranet and a web site. Groupwise is extensively used. We have data warehousing system for our documents. The Corpus system is a weakness - cannot link to the internet

[Q15] What are your main ways of acquiring knowledge and which channels do you use often? [Q16] Are there ways to make tacit knowledge (i.e., knowledge in people’s heads) conscious

and explicit and do you believe that employees would be willing to share their knowledge if asked? If not, why do think so? -


Cape Gateway: People do not understand it. We have a PowerPoint presentation and had a roadshow to all the Departments. We need to give meaning to the White Paper on Knowledge Economy, practical level. The Economic Development Committee is the driver. We are looking at other Departments key objectives to align them.

Interview 13 Japie van Heerden. Deputy Director General: Transport (Infrastructure)

(Has been in the position for three months. We had a general discussion which focused on the need for training).

There is no problem with a bureaucracy. What is needed is a change in attitude or mindset. When I joined government thirty years ago as an engineer I received training. I think this is missing at the moment, so new employees without experience cannot be employed. There is a need for training courses and I have a budget for this. We are not utilising our knowledge correctly. We need a transfer of skills with the private sector. I agree that we need to capture the lessons learnt in our projects.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT


1

SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

An Assessment of the Readiness of the Western Cape Department of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Tourism (DEAAT) for the Knowledge Economy

WHAT IS KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT? • It is the process by which the organisation generates wealth from its intellectual or

knowledge-based assets (Bukowitz & Williams, 1999) • It is the explicit and systematic management of vital knowledge and its associated

processes of creation, storage, retrieval, transfer, and application, in pursuit of organisational objectives (Skyrme, 1999)

Purpose of the Questionnaire: To obtain the opinions of staff throughout the DEAAT regarding its knowledge

management processes (creating, sharing, application and storage/retrieval of knowledge).

Confidentiality: Please note that the information obtained from respondents is solely for research

purposes and will at all times be treated as confidential. INSTRUCTIONS:

• There are no correct or incorrect answers. Decide to what degree each of the following statements describes your Branch or Department best.

• Select one of the following: STRONGLY AGREE, AGREE, SO-SO, DISAGREE, STRONGLY DISAGREE for each statement by making a tick in the appropriate box.

Example:

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT DIAGNOSTIC

STR

ON

GLY

DIS

AG

REE

DIS

AG

REE

SO-S

O

AG

REE

STR

ON

GLY

AG

REE

1 Groups and individuals routinely share information about their expertise

√

COPYRIG

HT U

CT


2

Please tick the appropriate box At which Branch do you work?

Transport

Business Promotion &

Tourism

Property Management &

Works

Agriculture

Corporate

Affairs

Knowledge Economy &

E-Government What is your Job Designation?

Deputy Director General, Chief Director, Director

Assistant Director, Deputy Director

Senior Admin, Technical

General Admin or Other

How long have you worked in your Branch/Department?

< 3 years

4 – 10 years

11 –15 years

>15 years


STR

ON

GLY

DIS

AG

REE

DIS

AG

REE

SO-S

O

AG

REE

STR

ON

GLY

AG

REE

1. Groups and individuals routinely share information about their expertise

2. Training on new systems focuses on how these technologies can be used to improve the quality and efficiency of how people work.

3. Specific individuals identify, collect, classify, summarise and disseminate organisational knowledge.

4. Experts play a role in identifying important information for other users

5. The electronic and physical places where we store our knowledge contain the best information available on a wide range of critical topics.

6. When people are given the task of searching for information they are able to fulfil the request.

7. The organisation has created electronic (e.g. Intranet) and paper-based tools which direct people to available resources.

8. We have established ways for people to document and share information.

9. People can search for information across a wide variety of applications and databases

10. We recognise that knowledge is part of our asset base.

11. Members of the senior management team frequently talk about knowledge management when reporting on the state of the organisation.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT


3


STR

ON

GLY

DIS

AG

REE

DIS

AG

REE

SO-S

O

AG

REE

STR

ON

GLY

AG

REE

12. We have developed a framework that links knowledge management activities to strategic outcomes.

13. Senior management assesses what knowledge needs to be developed when it allocates resources.

14. Assessment of knowledge-based assets is part of our overall organisational performance measurement process.

15. We have mapped the process flow of knowledge management activities.

16. People apply what they learn outside the organisation to their work.

17. Teams engage in off-site learning experiences to find better ways of working together.

18. Reflecting on lessons learned from work experiences is an established practice in our organisation.

19. When people finish projects, they generally take the time to meet with their team and analyse what went wrong and what could have been done better.

20. Our learning process often includes gathering feedback from customers.

21. People admit when they fail.

22. People apply the ideas they developed in past work situations to their current work.

23. Our organisation supports group activities that promote mutual learning.

24. We treat disagreement as an opportunity to learn from one another.

25. Dedicated roles, such as knowledge manager or knowledge co-ordinator, support the knowledge-sharing process.

26. People in our organisation would say that sharing knowledge does not diminish the individual's value to the organisation.

27. We link people across traditional organisational units and functional groups to promote knowledge sharing.

28. Knowledge-sharing behaviour is built into the performance appraisal system.

29. Our organisation looks for ways to remove barriers to knowledge sharing.

30. People can identify others in the organisation that might benefit from their knowledge.

31. Our reporting relationships do not interfere with people(other than our direct line manager) getting the information they need.

32. We seriously consider what others might call crazy or outrageous ideas as part of our problem-solving process.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT


4


STR

ON

GLY

DIS

AG

REE

DIS

AG

REE

SO-S

O

AG

REE

STR

ON

GLY

AG

REE

33. Most people speak up if they have an opinion or idea to offer.

34. We give all promising ideas thorough consideration, no matter whom they come from.

35. We make a point of not structuring some of our meetings because it helps us think more creatively about problem solving.

36. Involving our customers in the process of creating and developing new products and services is a well-established practice in our organisation.

37. People would describe our organisation as flexible rather than rigid.

38. Our workspace is designed to promote the flow of ideas between work groups.

39. People in our organisation can use the information they get to improve their work.

40. We use approaches that people would call playful as part of our problem-solving process.

41. We actively collaborate with other spheres of government when we need information.

42. We treat information as an open resource that flows freely to all corners of our organisation.

43. We value the contribution of ideas of everyone in our organisation.

44. We often meet away from our offices in relaxed settings to discuss work-related issues.

45. The hierarchy in our organisation is not a barrier to the flow of ideas and information.

46. We routinely ask ourselves how we can leverage our knowledge into other areas.

47. Our IT systems connect us to information sources we need to do our work.

48. Our IT systems promote the formation of different networks of people.

49. Our managers include knowledge management in their business plans.

50. Our organisation treats people like assets rather than costs.

51. We find ourselves increasingly teaming up with other organisations in strategic networks or partnerships to bring innovative products/services to our customers.

52. We view information technology as a tool to help us get our work done.

COPYRIG

HT U

CT


5


STR

ON

GLY

DIS

AG

REE

DIS

AG

REE

SO-S

O

AG

REE

STR

ON

GLY

AG

REE

53. People who leave the organisation are given the opportunity to document their tacit (stored in their head) knowledge.

54. We have a formal policy that ensures we share technology and ideas across unit or departmental border.

55. It is easy to retrieve documents from their electronic or physical storage spaces.

56. We apprentice our people to other organisations to determine if we need to acquire new skills or expertise

57. We form alliances with organisations that complement our skills sets as an alternative to doing everything ourselves.

58. We outsource skills and expertise that do not support our core competencies

59. Before people are retrenched, our organisation try to determine if their skills and expertise can be used elsewhere.

60. Most people in our organisation have access to a personal computer.

If you have any queries please contact: Nicolette Fielies Knowledge Management and E-Government Provincial Administration: Western Cape Tel: (021) 483 4141 Email: [email protected]

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

APPENDIX 3 – Traditions of Western Epistemology

TRADITIONS OF WESTERN EPISTEMOLOGY

RATIONALISM EMPIRICISM

Knowledge can be obtained deductively by reasoning through mental constructs: concepts, Laws or theories, e.g. mathematics

A priori knowledge No need to justify by sensory experience

Knowledge can be obtained inductively from sensory experiences, e.g. experimental science.

No a priori knowledge Only source of knowledge is sensory

perception Plato: theory of "idea" or "form";

influenced by Socrates

Aristotle: "Idea" or "form" cannot be isolated from physical object

CONTINENTAL RATIONALISM BRITISH EMPIRICISM Rene Descartes: Ultimate truth - deduced onfrom the real existence of a 'thinking self'

John Locke: Only experience can provide the mind with ideas

Immanuel Kant: Transcendental Idealism Philosophy Knowledge only arises when both the logical thinking of rationalism and sensory experiences of empiricism work together.

Georg Hegel: Knowledge begins with sensory perception, which becomes more subjective and

rational through a dialectic purification of the senses, until the self-knowledge stage. Karl Marx: Perception is an interaction between the knower (subject) and the known (object)

In the pursuit of knowledge, both subject and object are in a continual and dialectic process of mutual adaptation.

PHENOMENOLOGY: Philosophical inquiry into the human consciousness of self and other objects. Knowledge is obtained through reflection. Edmund Hussert: Importance of conscious, direct experience Martin Heidigger: Being in the world and having to do with something

EXISTENTIALISM: Jean Paul Satre: If we want to know the world, we must act toward an end.

ANALYTICAL PHILOSOPHY: Ludwig Wiltgenstein: focus on language with which people describe phenomen

PRAGMATISM: American philosophical tradition William James John Dewey

SYNTHESIS

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

An interactive relationship between human beings and the world by means of human action, experiment and experience.

JAPANESE INTELLECTUAL TRADITION: Buddhism, Confucianism Oneness of humanity and nature Oneness of body and mind Oneness of self and other

SCIENTIFIC VIEW OF KNOWLEDGE HUMANISTIC VIEW OF KNOWLEDGE Frederick Taylor (1911) Scientific Management: formalises

worker’s experience and tacit skills into objective and scientific knowledge

Mechanistic rationality

George Mayo (1920/30s) “Hawthorn effects”- Social factors

and interpersonal skills improved productivity

Human factors

CHESTER BARNARD: (1930s)

• Knowledge consists of logical, linguistic content, and behavioural non-linguistic. • Leaders create values, beliefs and ideas to maintain the knowledge system. • Importance of behavioural knowledge in management processes

HERBERT SIMON • 1945- Barnard was criticised for

pre-occupation with strategic factors.

• View of organisation as an “information processing machine”

• Formalised information and knowledge by disregarding behavioural knowledge.

GARBAGE CAN MODEL • Cohen, March and Olsen (1972) • Irrational and ambiguous nature of

human problem-solving and decision-making

SENSEMAKING • Karl Weick (1969) • “Reality is an on-going accomplishment

that emerges from efforts to create order and make retrospective sense of what occurs”

SCIENCE OF STRATEGY • Boston Consulting Group (1960s) • Similar to Taylorism • Business strategy concerned with

total cost • Strategy planning techniques

PIMS project

ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE • Schein (1985): sharing of values • Viewed the organisation as a shared

meaning system.

SYNTHESIS

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

• Michael Porter – Five Forces Model

SYNTHESIS OF SCIENTIFIC AND HUMANISTIC APPROACHES

KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY

ORGANISATIONAL LEARNING

RESOURCE-BASED VIEW TO STRATEGY

Peter Drucker (1960s) Knowledge work/workers

1990s - Most important challenge – to build systematic practices for managing self –transformation

Organisations abandon the obsolete knowledge and learn to create new knowledge

Recognise the importance of tacit knowledge (apprenticeship and experience)

Argyrise & Schon (1978) Single and double loop

learning Peter Senge – adaptive

and generative learning 5 disciplines Systems thinking Personal mastery Mental models Shared vision Team learning

(Trying to overcome Cartesian Dualism)

Competencies, capabilities, skills or strategic assets as source of strategic competitive advantage

Rooted in Edith Penrose (1959 – Theory of the Firm)

Prahalad and Hamel (1990) - core competence

Teece, Pisano, Shuen (1991) – dynamic capabilities

Stalk, Evans, Shulman (1992) – capabilities based competition

Heterogeneity – unique cluster of resources and capabilities

Internal resource focus rather than external industry focus.

SYNTHESIS

APPENDIX 2 – The Western Cape Provincial Government’s Policy Objectives

Provincial Vision

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

PPG 5 To empower the poor people of our Province through the provision of basic services.

Vision for the Western Cape Economy

The Learning Cape

The Cape of Good Hope for all

PPG 1 To contribute to the creation of a safer environment for our people. PPG 2 To create an enabling environment for economic growth.

PPG 4 To contain the spread of HIV AIDS and Tuberculosis.PPG 3 To prepare the people of the Western Cape for the knowledge economy of the 21st century.

Provincial Policy Goals

The improvement of the quality of life for all the people of the Province

The Enterprising Cape The International Cape

PPG 6 To improve the quality and accessibility of services provided by the Provincial Government. PPG 7 To protect, enhance and promote the total environment for the optimal development of our people. PPG 8 To maintain and improve the physical infrastructure required for the development of this Province.

PPG 9 To bind the Province, as the gateway to Africa, ever stronger to the country and the continent.

To make the Western Cape the most successful, innovative and competitive economic region in Southern Africa, with a world renowned reputation for its knowledge base, the creativity and enterprise of its people, the attractions of its

infrastructure and natural environment, and the quality of life of all of those who live and work here.

The Four Pillars supporting the vision for the Western Cape Economy

Strategic Imperatives

World class infrastructure and business environment

One of the most attractive places for investors and touristsStrategy for export promotion

Quality marketing

Putting the Western Cape in the fast lane of the information and communication super-highway

Policy objectives

Selected Strategic Initiatives

Use ICT revolution to enable everyone to access and use information to maximum benefit and to conduct business more cost effectively

Use ICT to improve the efficient and effective delivery of government services

Raise awareness on the vital role of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) in the economy

Develop and expand ICT infrastructure to world class standard

Establish an electronic precint in the Cape Town CBDEstablish the CAPE GATEWAY single access point to

government information resources and servicesCreate the CAPE - ON - LINE network of websites

Integrate with existing websites

Promote co-operation and collaboration in the development and operation of ICT between all sectors

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

APPENDIX 1 – The South African Government’s Support for ICT

Mbeki all ears as world’s IT gurus gather to lend Africa support source: Sunday Times, Business Times section, 28 October, 2001 State ‘can use IT to uplift quality of life’ source: Business Day, 23 October, 2001

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

APPENDIX 17 Guideline for Creating a Knowledge Asset The following guideline was adapted with permission from Carol Gorelick of Solutions for Information and Management Services, New York. 1) Define Scope

a. What is the subject? What will it cover? It needs to cover a specific and not

too broad function or business activity.

b. What will the content include?

c. What do you need to know to do your business (job)?

d. What is the biggest issue facing you?

e. Do you need to know processes, techniques, people, or reasons for doing

something, legal or regulatory requirements?

f. Do you need to know who, what, why and/or how?

g. Why are you doing this? What can or would happen if you DO NOT capture

the knowledge?

2) Create a Community of Practice

The COP plays several roles:

a. Takes ownership of the knowledge asset.

b. Source of the knowledge

c. Users of knowledge in the future

d. People who ensure the information/knowledge is accurate and up to date

3) Collect existing material

Interviews with key people

Important documents and artefacts

Lessons learned

4) Describe the context for the knowledge asset

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

Background

Purpose

Benefits

Relevance

5) Develop general practices describing your job or the process you are addressing

Go through the history (the records of previous work) and/or people’s

experience and try to find the common knowledge. Different people will have

seen certain approaches work at certain times. Are there general guidelines

that you can derive? This is a creativity and value-adding step but it is a

challenge. You are taking what may be a mass of material and distilling it to

something useful to anyone interested in this function.

6) Develop a checklist for a user of the knowledge asset

What questions should the user be asking you?

What information does the user need to gather?

What steps does the user need to take?

Create the checklist either as a list of questions, a template describing steps

(e.g., how to write project descriptions), or one-line recommendations (e.g.,

safety tips).

Add stories, quotes and examples to the checklist to make it come alive.

Include a library of related documents and links for users to get more detailed

information. Include pictures, if applicable. Include a list of people who have

more knowledge and can be a source of advice to users. Include contact

information, a picture and a link to a personal web page for each.

7) Provide information about the KA owner

The person who wrote the practices

Include contact information, photo and email link. You can use the label

“Who can help?”

COPYRIG

HT U

CT

8) Provide date when KA was created or updated

9) Validate the content with community members.

Does it reflect knowledge and experience?

Will it be useful to a new user?

Do you have anything to add?

10) Put the knowledge Asset into an appropriate medium or vehicle for distribution

Corporate Website

Local Website

11) Launch the KA

12) Keep it alive and update it

Encourage feedback from users.

Ensure there is an active owner.

13) Using trained facilitators to create the KA