Organizational capabilities as predictors of effective knowledge management: An empirical examination

ORGANIZATIONAL CAPABILITIES AS PREDICTORS OF EFFECTIVE KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT: AN EMPIRICAL EXAMINATION By Kimberly K. Anderson Knowledge management has become one of the most important trends in business, yet many knowledge management initiatives fail. To understand the success and failure of knowledge management, firms must identify and assess the organizational capabilities required for the effort to prosper, which is the focus of this study. Literature has offered important theoretical grounding for this study with regard to organizational capability as a predictor of knowledge management effectiveness, but empirical examination is lacking. The capabilities have been identified as knowledge infrastructure capability (consisting of cultural, structural, and technological) and knowledge process capability (consisting of knowledge acquisition, conversion, application, and protection). The research model was adopted from Gold, Malhotra, and Segars (2001). This research broke new ground in the field of knowledge management by examining the relationships between knowledge infrastructure capability, knowledge process capability, and organizational effectiveness from the dual perspective of the team (within business units) in contrast to the organization (across business units). Organizations develop knowledge infrastructure to drive desired behaviors, yet knowledge workers develop processes to circumvent the organization’s infrastructure (cultural and structural barriers). This may contribute to the problem of knowledge management failure. However, the relationships between knowledge infrastructure and knowledge processes have not been empirically examined, until this study. In addition, most knowledge management research is conducted at the organization level, yet most knowledge management implementation occurs at the team level (project teams, business units, social groups). To help bridge the gaps between theory and practice, this study aligned the unit of analysis more closely with the practitioners’ level of implementation. Using only the organization as the unit of analysis would provide little guidance for business leaders in how they can influence the success of knowledge management programs, and it would present an incomplete picture when assessing the relationships between organizational capabilities and knowledge management effectiveness. The organization perspective helps with generalizability of this study, while the team perspective leads to results of a more informative and prescriptive nature for practitioners. Because the field of knowledge management is driven by practical need, this study offers many important managerial implications. Kimberly K. Anderson Data was collected from several business units of a Fortune 100 multinational firm and assessed using Structural Equation Modeling. The structural models were developed to test the hypothesized relationships and answer the research questions. As a result, this research provides empirical evidence that knowledge management capabilities are a contributing factor of organizational effectiveness. In addition, it can be concluded that firms with superior absorptive capacity and knowledge integration processes will improve their knowledge management capability. The results of this study include the findings that knowledge infrastructure drives knowledge processes, that organization-level knowledge processes drive team-level knowledge processes, and that knowledge protection is seen as a corporate responsibility rather than a team or individual responsibility. Overall, the findings conform to the literature and lend credibility to Gold et al.’s (2001) theory that effective knowledge management, as measured by its impact on organizational performance, is dependent on the firm’s knowledge infrastructure capability and knowledge process capability. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I owe thanks to many people who supported me while I worked on this dissertation. I am grateful for having a supportive and patient doctoral committee and wish to thank Dr. Bahaudin Mujtaba and Dr. Frank Cavico for their guidance and patience, and Dr. Paul Dion for his tireless efforts and encouragement during the statistical analysis part of this research effort. Without their support, I would have not succeeded. I also owe thanks to Kathleen Cool, Coordinator of Doctoral Dissertations, for helping me navigate the process. I would especially like to thank my wonderful husband who lovingly supported and encouraged me without ever complaining. Finally, I would like to recognize Edward Murphy, eponymous of Murphy’s Law, for his influence showed up so much during this dissertation that he deserves to be recognized.