A Project Report

On

Knowledge Management to Enhance

Intellectual Capital of a R&D Organisation:
‘Steel Authority of India Limited, Ranchi’

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree

Master in Business Administration (MBA)

by

S. Thirumalai Selvam
Enrolment No.: 111168343

Under the Supervision of

Sri. Pranav Kumar

Assistant General Manager (Academics) & Senior Faculty Member
Management Training Institute (MTI)
Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL)
Post: Doranda, Ranchi- 834002, Jharkhand State

INCLUDEPICTURE "[Link]
id=H.4814586500483465&pid=15.1" \* MERGEFORMATINET
INCLUDEPICTURE "[Link]
id=H.4814586500483465&pid=15.1" \* MERGEFORMATINET
INCLUDEPICTURE "[Link]
id=H.4814586500483465&pid=15.1" \* MERGEFORMATINET
 INCLUDEPICTURE "[Link]

id=H.4814586500483465&pid=15.1" \* MERGEFORMATINET

Indira Gandhi National Open University

Study Centre, Ranchi (Jharkhand)
Knowledge Management to Enhance
Intellectual Capital of a R&D Organisation:
‘Steel Authority of India Limited, Ranchi’

A Project Report

by

S. Thirumalai Selvam

Enrolment No.: 111168343

Project work shall be carried out at

Research and Development Centre for Iron and Steel (RDCIS)

Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL)
Ranchi-834004, JharkhandState
 INCLUDEPICTURE "[Link]
id=H.4814586500483465&pid=15.1" \* MERGEFORMATINET
INCLUDEPICTURE "[Link]
id=H.4814586500483465&pid=15.1" \* MERGEFORMATINET
INCLUDEPICTURE "[Link]
id=H.4814586500483465&pid=15.1" \* MERGEFORMATINET
INCLUDEPICTURE "[Link]

id=H.4814586500483465&pid=15.1" \* MERGEFORMATINET

Indira Gandhi National Open University

Study Centre, Ranchi (Jharkhand)

CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY

This is to certify that the project titled,“KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT TO ENHANCE

INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL OF A R&D ORGANISATION: STEEL AUTHORITY

OF INDIA LIMITED, RANCHI”is an original work of the student and is being submitted

in partial fulfillment for the award of the Master’s Degree in Business Administration of

Indira Gandhi National Open University. This report has not been submitted earlier either to

this University or to any other University/Institution for the fulfillment of the requirement of

a course of study.

_________________________ _______________________
SIGNATURE OF GUIDE SIGNATURE OF STUDENT

Place: Place:
Date: Date:
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I feel privileged to take this opportunity to express my sincere gratitude to my project guide

Mr. Pranav Kumar, Assistant General Manager (Academic) & Sr. Faculty Member,

Management Training Institute (MTI) of Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL), Ranchi for

his expert advice, feedback, support and encouragement throughout the completion of this

dissertation entitled, Knowledge Management to Enhance Intellectual Capital of a R&D

Organisation: Steel Authority of India Limited, Ranchi. He is also my constant source of

inspiration, strength, motivation and perseverance in completion of this project work.

Thanks, must also be extended to all the staff in the library at Management Training Institute

(MTI) of SAIL and R & D Centre for Iron and Steel (RDCIS) of SAIL for the help, support

and assistance in completion of this Project.

My sincere thanks to all the respondents who contributed willingly and enthusiastically to my

qualitative research process by supplying the requisite information towards the completion

of the questionnaire there by enable me to collect the relevant data. My thanks also to all my

MBA classmates who provided mutual support, encouragement, and many laughs throughout

the journey over the past few years.

I would also like to thank my family and friends for their motivation and support. A special

thanks to my wife, Mrs. S Karpagam for her unwavering support. And most of all to my

children, Umapriya and Dinesh for ensuring life remained in perspective.

November 06, 2017 S Thirumalai Selvam

 Enrollment No.: 111168343

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW
PROFILE OF STEEL AUTHORITY OF
INDIA LIMITED (SAIL)
3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
4.0 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
5.0 CONCLUSION
6.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY
7.0 APPENDICES
 Chapter - 1
Introduction
1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Knowledge : An Introduction

"Knowledge has become the key economic resource and the dominant and perhaps even the

only resource of competitive advantage.” - Peter Drucker.

The above quotation summarises the premise that this dissertation endeavours to explore. To

be able to compete commercially in its specific marketplace, particularly in a recessionary

period such as that which is currently prevalent, it is essential for organisations to maximise

the potential of its internal strengths, competences and knowledge to increase organisational

effectiveness. The aim of any commercial organisation is to maintain or increase its

profitability, and to maximise the wealth of its shareholders. To deliver targets, and to

achieve the aims and goals set out in an organisation’s mission statement and corporate

strategy, it must strive, through overall effectiveness to generate competitive advantage over

rivals.

Few research work has been conducted that can provide real insights for organisations

wishing to gain a competitive advantage through people’s personal knowledge, but greater

empirical research indicates that dedicated knowledge sharing and management can have a

significant positive impact on organisational effectiveness, thus ultimately leading to

competitive advantage.

Knowledge Management is a newly emerging, interdisciplinary business model that has

knowledge within the framework of an organization as its focus. Knowledge Management

has now become a mainstream priority for any of the organization for achieving competitive

advantage.

Knowledge Management can be defined as “a systematic process of identifying, capturing

and transferring information and knowledge to help make best decision, exploit business

opportunities and innovate”. It basically aims to bridge the gap between ‘what an individual

knows and what he/ she needs to know’ and ‘what an organization knows and what it needs

to know’.

1.2 Importance of the topic

Research and Development (R&D) organizations are specifically meant for creating

innovative solutions and generate lot of outcome in the form of ‘knowledge’. Since,

knowledge is the most vital asset of the organization; it needs to be carefully dealt with.

This dissertation generally highlights the facilitating & enabling role of Knowledge

Management in a R&D organisation. Knowledge Management meets the essential

requirements of problem solving, generation of innovative ideas and productivity

enhancement activities of R&D organisations. In R&D, knowledge creation, capturing,

organizing, storing and its utilization, all are going in parallel and require utmost care for

maximizing benefits.

Organizations that pursue the fastest R&D and possess the management capability to

integrate and allocate internal and external resources would enjoy success in a global

competitive environment. In today’s volatile and changing environment, any R&D program
cannot be started from scratch especially in developing countries due to many constraints.

R&D is important but it is risky and costly. Although passing through logical steps and doing

design iterations help building concrete footings but funding constraints does not allow this

luxury. Researchers should take lead from current practices being adapted in advanced

countries. With every passing day, the knowledge is getting multiplied and accordingly needs

more attention for proper management. Moreover, knowledge acquired during past projects

has to be well integrated and utilized in current and future projects as well. Knowledge

management helps identifying knowledge gaps and requirements, bridging knowledge gaps,

creation of new knowledge, managing existing knowledge and sharing of knowledge. To

make the R&D process a success, one has to realize the importance of knowledge

management in the organization. This is because R&D is meant for the generation of new

knowledge. Knowledge is considered a principal source of competitive advantage which

coincides with the knowledge based view of organizations. To achieve sustainable

competitive advantage, organizations must constantly generate, propagate, and utilize new

knowledge.

1.3 Motivation on the topic

Research and Development (R&D) Management is not generally included in curriculum of

any university or institute; furthermore, there is scarcity of foreign qualified experts of this

field in R&D organizations to ensure proper management. Also, no such research has been

conducted in SAIL so far to utilize knowledge management best practices in R&D

organizations.
Research and Development organizations of Steel Industries in India and especially SAIL are

not performing well and are facing immense pressure for showing significant results.

Therefore, there is a need to familiarize the stakeholders with the idea of knowledge

management which is already facilitating organizations of advanced countries in harvesting

benefits. There is need to create awareness in SAIL regarding intangible assets i.e. knowledge

which is held by humans. SAIL is facing problems of brain drain. Furthermore, the SAIL is

unable to retain and utilize the highly skilled professionals for some reason or the other and

that is the reason that experts prefer to work abroad than in the home country. If the

stakeholders of the country and main organizations are convinced with the knowledge

management philosophy, retention and utilization of professionals may become possible. The

intangible sources of motivation for sharing knowledge, developing new techniques for

betterment of the society can be adopted to attract the knowledgeable people.

SAIL’s R&D organizations are also working in collaboration with foreign organizations

through knowledge sharing contracts. The techniques of knowledge management will surely

help in acquiring the most valuable deliverable of these contracts i.e. knowledge. In order to

replicate and advance the products, SAIL has to learn the design and development iterations

which can be assured by deep involvement and interaction of people i.e. the core of

knowledge management approach.

I am of the view that any organisation would benefit from a better understanding of the

concept, and whilst most organisations would employ a Knowledge Management system to

some degree, for many, including organisations with whom I have been employed, it is a

function that operates almost unwittingly, with little or no formal structure. I am also
interested in the potential that a deeper insight into, and understanding of, the topic may

present for me in the way of future career opportunities, in either the business or academic

sectors, or both.

1.4 Definitions of Knowledge

Definitions of knowledge range from the practical to the conceptual and philosophical and

from narrow to broad in scope (Beckman, 1999). The practical definitions focus on the

functions of knowledge as in problem-solving and decision-making. Woolf (1990) defined

knowledge as organized information applicable to problem solving.” Broadly, Turban (1992)

said that “knowledge is information that has been organized and analyzed to make it

understandable and applicable to problem solving or decision making.” And Beckman (1997)

said that knowledge is reasoning about information and data to actively enable performance,

problem solving, decision making, learning, and teaching.

Meanwhile, some scholars define ‘knowledge’ conceptually. For instance, Clarke (1998)

defines knowledge as “an understating of why and how something works.” Davenport,

DeLong and Beer (1998) said that “knowledge is simply stated as information combined with

experience, context, interpretation, and reflection.” As for philosophical definitions, there are

a few. Wiig (1993) believed that “knowledge consists of truths and beliefs, perspectives and

concepts, judgments and expectation methodologies, and know-how.” Sowa (1984) said that

“knowledge encompasses the implicit and explicit restrictions placed upon objects (entities),

operations, and relationships along with general and specific heuristics and inference

procedures involved in the situation being modeled.”Van der Spek and Spijkervet (1997)
define ‘knowledge’ as “the whole set of insights, experiences, and procedures that are

considered correct and true and that therefore guide the thoughts, behaviors, and

communications of people.”

This insightful analogy creates a logical link between knowledge and organizations and

begins a paradigm shift in the need to pay attention to the collective thoughts of the people

within the organization as knowledge contributors. This kind of knowledge is called

‘organizational knowledge.’ Brooking (1996) defined the organizational knowledge as “the

collective sum of human centered assets, intellectual property assets, infrastructure assets,

and market assets.” Myers (1996) thought that “organizational knowledge is processed

information embedded in routines and processes that enable action. It is also knowledge

captured by the organization’s system, processes, products, rules, and culture.”

To address the question of how to define knowledge, a researcher must distinguish among

knowledge, information, and data. If knowledge is not something that is different from either

data or information, then there is nothing new or interesting about knowledge management

(Fahey & Prusak, 1998). It is obvious that numerous authors are becoming more sensitive to

the distinctions among data, information, and knowledge. A commonly held view is that data

represent raw facts, information is organized data, and knowledge is formatted information

(Raisinghani, 2000). Data are simple observations of states of the world; information is data

endowed with relevance and purpose; and knowledge is valuable information (Davenport,

1997). Tuomi (1999) argued that knowledge must exist before information can be formulated

and before data can be measured to form information later. Tuomi (1999) used the

development of computer systems as an example and argues that data emerges as a result of
adding value to information. Information in turn is knowledge that has been structured,

articulated, and verbalized. When articulated, verbalized, and structured, knowledge is stored

in computer memory for automatic manipulation. The meaning of information within the

knowledge must be represented. Information is then split into atoms that have no meaning to

allow automatic processing. Finally, when information is assigned a fixed representation and

standard interpretation, data is created. Critical to this argument is the concept that

knowledge does not exist outside of an agent or knower, and is indelibly shaped by one's

needs as well as one's initial stock of knowledge (Alavi & Leidner, 2001).

1.5 Features of Knowledge

There are many dimensions in which knowledge is featured. Three features of knowledge

will be examined in detail: storage media, accessibility, and hierarchy. There are several

media in which knowledge can reside – human mind, organization, document, and computer.

Knowledge in the human mind is often difficult to access; organizational knowledge is often

diffuse and distributed; document knowledge can range from free text to well-structured

charts and tables; computer knowledge is formalized, shareable, and often well-structured

and well organized but fragmented across multiple systems of databases.

Another feature is knowledge accessibility. Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) have divided

accessibility into two categories – tacit and explicit just as Polanyi described knowledge

itself. In Liebowitz and Beckman’s (1998) view, there may be three stages of accessibility:

tacit, implicit, and explicit. Accessibility can be mapped to storage media. Knowledge gains

in value as it becomes more accessible and formal:

  Tacit (human mind, organization): accessible indirectly only with difficulty through

knowledge elicitation and observation of behavior.

 Implicit (human mind, organization): accessible through querying and discussion, but

informal knowledge must first be located and then communicated.

 Explicit (document, organization): readily accessible, as well as documented into

formal knowledge sources that are often well organized.

A further dimension considers the premise that knowledge can be organized into a hierarchy.

Several authors (Alter, 1996; Bhatt, 2001) draw distinctions between data, information, and

knowledge. Data, information and knowledge are three related but not interchangeable

concepts. Defining data, information, and knowledge is difficult. Only through external

means or from a user's perspectives, can one distinguish between data, information, and

knowledge. Data are a set of discrete, objective facts about events (facts, images, or sounds).

Information is organized data presented in context. Data becomes information when their

creator adds meanings or value (formatted, filtered, and summarized data). Similarly,

knowledge derives from information as information derives from data. Knowledge can be

viewed as information in context, together with an understanding of how to use it (instincts,

ideas, rules, and procedures that guide actions and decisions). In general, data are considered

as raw facts, information is regarded as an organized set of data, and knowledge is perceived

as meaningful information.

Knowledge is an organized combination of data, assimilated with a set of rules, procedures,

and operations learned through experience and practice. In a sense, knowledge is the

‘meaning’ made by the mind (Marakas, 1999). Without meaning, there is only information or
data. It is only through meaning that information finds life and becomes knowledge (Bhatt,

2000). Thus, the distinction between information and knowledge depends on users’

perspectives. Knowledge is context dependent, since ‘meanings’ are interpreted in reference

to a particular paradigm (Marakas, 1999).

1.6 Types of Knowledge

An understanding of the classification of knowledge is an important step towards knowledge

management. Typologies of knowledge are defined, categorized, and described in terms of

knowledge type-conversion, including structural features, elementary properties, purpose and

use, and conceptual levels (Beckman, 1999). Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) suggested the

‘Tacit Knowledge’ and ‘Explicit Knowledge’ as the types of knowledge. Also, they

developed a matrix for knowledge conversion based on accessibility. Collins (1997) also

relates knowledge types to their accessibility: ‘symbol type knowledge’ (explicit), ‘embodied

knowledge’ (implicit), ‘embrained knowledge’ (implicit/tacit), and ‘encultured knowledge’

(tacit). Van der Spek and Spijkervet (1997) discuss the structural features of knowledge for

classification: availability (form, time, location), and content (structure, application). Parsaye

and Chignell (1988) describe five elementary properties of knowledge that can be used to

define and represent objects and their interactions: 1) Naming (proper nouns), 2) Describing

(adjectives), 3) Organizing (categorization and possession), 4) Relating (transitive verbs and

relationship nouns), and 5) Constraining (conditions).

Based on purpose of use of knowledge, Quinine, Anderson, and Finkelstein (1996) suggests

the following typology: 1) Know-what, 2) Know-how, 3) Knowwhere, 4) Know –why, and 5)

Care-why. According to Brooking (1996), there are four conceptual levels of knowledge: 1)

Goal-setting or idealistic knowledge, 2) Systematic knowledge, 3) Pragmatic knowledge, and

4) Automatic knowledge. Demarest (1997) categorizes shared knowledge in four groups:

1) Imperatives, which are those directives that are unchallenged because they derive from the

firm’s dogma 2) Patterns, described as predictive models that have ‘a certain longevity,

durability and level of universality [and that] describe the likely shape of scenes that call for

particular kinds of knowledge 3) Rules, which include algorithms and heuristic, and 4)

Scripts, or prescriptions for performance, which are therefore more than rules. According to

Chua (2002), knowledge can be classified along many dimensions, such as private-public,

component-architectural, individual-collective and explicit-tacit. Figure 1.1 shows how such

schemes of classification can be integrated to produce a comprehensive taxonomy of

knowledge.
Source: Chua (2002). Taxonomy of Organizational Knowledge. Singapore Management

Review, Vol. 2 (2), p. 69.

Private Knowledge versus Public Knowledge: One dimension to classify organizational

knowledge is to dichotomize it into private and public knowledge (Matusik and Hill, 1998).

Private knowledge refers to the knowledge uniquely possessed by the organization. It

represents a resource that is valuable, rare, and imperfectly imitable (Barney, 1991).

Examples of private knowledge include the organization’s unique practices, processes,

documentation, or business strategies. Public knowledge consists of knowledge not

proprietary to any particular organization. It resides in the public domain. This knowledge

includes industry and occupational best practices.

Component Knowledge versus Architectural Knowledge: Private knowledge can be

further classified along the component-architecture dimension (Matusik and Hill, 1998).

Component knowledge is knowledge that relates to a subroutine or discrete aspect of an

organization's operation. The components found in an organization are the resources,

knowledge, skills, and technical systems (Amit & Schoemaker, 1993; Henderson &

Cockburn, 1994). Architectural knowledge differs from component knowledge in that it

relates to organization-wide routines and schema for coordinating the various components of

the organization (Henderson and Clark, 1990). Matusik and Hill (1998) found that there is

often no one individual who is in a position to see, comprehend, and articulate the totality of

architectural knowledge. Due to its unique nature and development, no two organizations

share the same architectural knowledge.

Individual Knowledge versus Collective Knowledge: Component knowledge as mentioned

above can be classified into individual knowledge and collective knowledge (Matusik and

Hill, 1998). Individual knowledge refers to the knowledge harbored by an individual in an

organization. If this knowledge is not shared with other members of the organization, the

organization can neither multiply nor leverage on the value of this expertise (Davenport and

Prusak, 1998).

However, if individual knowledge is shared, it becomes collective knowledge. Collective

knowledge is therefore the knowledge held commonly by a group of organization members.

This includes organizing principles, routines, practices, and relative organizational consensus

on past experiences, goals andmissions (Zander and Kogut, 1995). Hence, by definition,
architectural knowledge is one form of collective knowledge, but not individual knowledge.

Collective knowledge is more secure and has more strategic significance than individual

knowledge (Spender, 1996). By comparison, collective knowledge is less volatile and less

easily affected by staff turnover. Hence, the transformation of individual knowledge into

collective knowledge has attracted much research interest among knowledge scholars (for

example, Fahey and Prusak, 1998).

Some researchers (Gowler and Legge, 1982) questioned whether there is any real difference

between collective knowledge and the aggregation of individual knowledge. Simon and

Davies (1996) maintained that the organization per se does not hold any knowledge; only its

members do. Hence, collective knowledge is actually the aggregate of the individuals’

knowledge in an organization. Meanwhile, Nelson and winter (1982) asserted that ‘collective

knowledge is an attribute of the organization just like its modus operandi and culture.’

Collective knowledge is therefore not reducible to what any single individual knows, or even

to any simple, aggregation of the various competencies and capabilities of all the individuals.

Weick and Roberts (1993) provide evidence to demonstrate that collective knowledge resides

at the organizational level. Their analysis acknowledges the reasoning that collective

knowledge is conceived to be socially and contextually embedded in an organization and not

a simple aggregation of knowledge held by a set of individuals.

Explicit Knowledge versus Tacit Knowledge: The most fundamental and common

classification of organizational knowledge is along the explicit-tacit dimension (Nonaka and

Takeuchi, 1995). In this classification, explicit knowledge is considered to be objective and

can be expressed unambiguously in words, numbers and specifications. Anne Brooking

(1999) defined ‘explicit knowledge’ as “knowledge which a person is able to make available

to another for inspection. This may mean it can be explained verbally, but it is generally

preferable to codify it, that is, write it down”. That is, it can be transferred via formal and

systematic methods in the form of official statements, rules and procedures (Nonaka and

Takeuchi, 1995; Polanyi, 1966).

Unlike explicit knowledge, tacit knowledge is subjective, situational and intimately tied to the

knower's experience (Kidd, 1998). It involves human understanding and individual

knowledge. Tacit knowledge resides in the heads of people and is gained mainly through

experience. Thus, it cannot be formalized, documented or communicated easily to others.

Insights, intuition, beliefs, personal skills and craft, and using rule-of-thumb to solve a

complex problem are examples of tacit knowledge. There are two components to tacit

knowledge (Nonaka and Konno, 1998). First is the technical component, which encompasses

the kind of informal personal skills or crafts often referred to as ‘know-how.’ Second is the

mental component. It consists of beliefs, ideals, values, schemata, and mental models that are

deeply ingrained in us, and often taken for granted. It is this mental component of tacit

knowledge that shapes the way we perceive the world.

Spender (1996) suggested that a relationship can be established between the individual-

collective dimension of knowledge and its explicit-tacit dimension to create a matrix

comprising four types of organizational knowledge as shown in table 1.1

 Table 1.1: Spender’s four types of organizational knowledge

Source: Spender J. C. (1996). Making Knowledge the Basis of a Dynamic Theory of the

Firm. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17 (winter special issue), p. 52.

The first type is individual explicit knowledge (Conscious knowledge) which represents the

expertise and knowledge available to the individual in forms that can be easily taught or

written down. The second type is individual implicit knowledge (Automatic knowledge)

which is knowledge held by the individual in forms of individual schemas, skills, habits, and

abstract knowledge and cannot be easily articulated (Lyles and Schwenk, 1992). The third

type is social explicit knowledge (Objectified knowledge) which is knowledge embedded in

an organization in forms that can be easily taught or written down. This type of knowledge

manifests itself in standard operating procedures, documentation, information systems, and

rules (Brown and Duguid, 1991). Finally, the fourth type is social implicit knowledge

(Collective knowledge) residing in organizational routines, culture and corporate mindset

(Spender, 1996). Such knowledge usually remains relatively obscure from individual

members but is accessible and sustained through their interaction (Spender, 1994).

Several researchers (Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998; Weick and Roberts, 1993) discovered that

high-performing organizations are better in creating and managing the collective tacit
knowledge (Collective knowledge) than mediocre ones. They attributed the strategic

importance of collective tacit knowledge to the fact that it represents the extent of knowledge

being distributed and leveraged among organization members and cannot be easily replicated

by rival organizations.

1.7 Conceptual Foundation of Knowledge Management

What is ‘Knowledge Management?

An early recognition of the concept of harnessing knowledge in the workplace is attributed to

the distinguished management guru Peter Drucker who, in the 1960s, introduced the concept

of the knowledge worker. In his book, The Post-Capitalist Society, he referred to knowledge

as displacing capital, natural resources and labor as a basic economic resource. As such, this

represents a break from the past. Also, Karl Wiig, management consultant and artificial

intelligence (AI) practitioner, is one of the field’s most prominent advocates as well as its

likely founder. He coined the term at a 1986 Swiss conference sponsored by the United

Nations – International Labor Organization (1997).

In action, knowledge management (KM) is a conscious decision on the part of an

organization to bring its staff together to help transform well-structured information into an

intellectual asset. It is not the technical economy or the information age. It is about

harnessing people’s intellectual capability. It could even help to bring together the aspirations

of education, business and government (Goldsmith, Morgan, and Ogg, 2004).

Definitions of Knowledge Management

Within the growing reference material in the area of KM, the definitions offered seem as

diverse as the potential applications of this emerging discipline.

This is likely because knowledge itself is defined in many different ways and approaches

from many different angles and levels of analysis. Some definitions emphasize the process of

knowledge management. Others focus on the object of knowledge management. Here are

some definitions of KM.

Hibbard (1997) defined KM as “the process of capturing a company’s collective expertise

wherever it resides – in databases, on paper, or in people’s heads – and distributing it to

wherever it can help produce the biggest payoff.” O’Dell and Grayson (1998) said that “KM

applies systematic approaches to find, understand, and use knowledge to create

value.”Meanwhile, Van de Spek (1997) described KM as “the explicit control of management

knowledge within an organization aimed at achieving the company’s objectives.” Macintosh

(1996) said that “KM involves the identification and analysis of available and required

knowledge, and the subsequent planning and control of actions to develop knowledge assets

so as to fulfill organization objectives.” Petrash (1996) believed that “KM is getting the right

knowledge to the right people at the right time so they can make the best decision.” And,

Beckman (1997) defined KM as “the formalization of an access to experiences, knowledge,

and expertise that creates new capabilities, enables superior performance, encourages

innovation, and enhances customer value.”

Rastogi (2000) provides a definition that seems to embrace the prism of KM. He states,

“knowledge management may be defined as a systematic and integrative process of

coordinating organization-wide activities of acquiring, creating, storing, sharing, diffusing,

developing, and deploying knowledge by individuals and groups in pursuit of major

organizational goals.” Similarly, Wiig (1997b) said that “KM is the systematic, explicit, and

deliberate building, renewal, and application of knowledge to maximize an enterprise’s

knowledgerelated effectiveness and returns from its knowledge assets.” Despite the

voluminous literature on KM, there is no readily accepted definition of knowledge

management (Earl, 2001).

Evolution of Knowledge Management

The expression, 'knowledge management', has been used in the literature for over a decade

now. Its evolution has been traced by many scholars (Ponzi, 2002; Wiig, 1997). The doctoral

dissertation of Ponzi (2002) traced the evolution and intellectual development of knowledge

management in a very comprehensive manner by using bibliometric techniques. According to

Ponzi (2002), knowledge management was born in the early 1990s and grew very slowly

until 1995. The KM literature grew exponentially from 1996 through 1999; it contracted in

2000, only to rebound in the following year. The evolution of KM suggests that it has lived

longer than a 'fad' and has followed the cycle of a 'management fashion' (Ponzi, 2002).

During the early formation of KM research (1991-1995), computer science and the business

strategy literature played a principal part; with computer science contributing a major share

and business strategy contributing a minor share (Ponzi, 2002). The computer science

literature viewed knowledge as an 'object' that can be managed better with the help of IT

(Ponzi, 2002). The business strategy literature featured a few authors (Hedlund, 1994;

Nonaka, 1994) but they were responsible for repositioning KM as a 'social process' rather

than an 'ITdriven concept' (Ponzi, 2002).

During the expansion phase (1996-1999), the KM literature grew at an exponential rate and

the disciplinary breadth increased from three disciplines (computer science, business, and

library and information sciences) in 1995, to thirteen disciplines in 1999. The literature

published in the popular press, that is un-refereed articles, grew by 1,425 percent during this

period while the academic literature grew by 674 percent (Ponzi, 2002). The most prolific

publication sources during this period were computer-related popular press publications

which emphasized IT tools for managing knowledge: Information Week, Computer World,

CIO, InfoWorld, and Computer Reseller News. However, the five most commonly cited

publications (i.e., Argyris & Schon, 1978; Nonaka, 1994; Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995;

Polanyi, 1966; Senge, 1990) originated from the organizational science literature, which

emphasized the process aspects of knowledge management. In the context of KM, this period

marked a shift from 'IT as databases' to 'IT as a communication and collaborative technology'

(Ponzi, 2002).

In the year 2000, the KM literature contracted by about 20 percent. The decreased interest in

KM in the popular press was attributable to two factors: KM investments were not yielding

returns and the dot-com bubble had burst. However, the academic literature continued to

grow at a steady rate (Ponzi, 2002).

1.8 Knowledge Management - An Information Technology Perspective

The literature on KM in the IT discipline viewed knowledge as an object that information

technology could manage (Ponzi, 2002). Viewing knowledge as an object is similar to

viewing it as a physical item that can be bought and placed wherever it is required. In other

words, this perspective viewed knowledge as information that has the qualities of an object,

for example, easy mobility. As a result, this perspective suggested that KM is closely linked

to the management of information technology and prescribed the following tools and

solutions for managing knowledge: intranets, data warehousing/knowledge repositories,

groupware/shareware, document management systems and decision support systems

(Ruggles, 1998).

The IT literature and developments in technology have had a major impact on knowledge

management practices. For example, Gray (2002) identified the following as KM practices:

co-location, communities of practice, electronic discussion groups, e-mail, instant messaging,

intranets, knowledge maps, knowledge repositories, mentoring, printed publications,

telephones, and training (Gray, 2002). It may be noted that at least half of these 12 practices

rests on IT infrastructure. These KM practices point to the impact that IT has on the manner

in which KM has been viewed by organizations.

1.9 Knowledge Management - An Organizational Knowledge Perspective

In contrast to the IT perspective on KM, which is mostly practitioner-driven, the literature on

Organizational Knowledge has stronger research foundations (Vera & Crossan, 2003).

Rooted in the resource-based view of the firm (Barney, 1986, 1991) and the knowledge-based
view of the firm (Grant, 1996a, 1996b; Kogut & Zander, 1996; Spender, 1996), this research

views knowledge as a key firm resource that can provide competitive advantage. In

particular, the knowledge based view asserts that firms exist because they are superior

mechanisms to markets for integrating and transferring knowledge (Kogut & Zander, 1992).

Consequently, much of the research in this stream has emphasized the need to exploit

knowledge available in the organization.

The research on organizational knowledge has also examined epistemological and ontological

questions related to knowledge. Knowledge has been defined by researchers in many

different ways; from what is known to what provides insight. Among the most commonly

found definitions are: (i) knowledge is a justified true belief (Nonaka, 1994:15), (ii)

knowledge is a justified personal belief that increases an individual's capacity to take

effective action (Alavi & Leidner, 1999:109), (iii) knowledge is a fluid mix of framed

experiences, values, contextual information and expert insight that provides a framework for

evaluating and incorporating new experiences and information (Davenport & Prusak,

1999:5), and (iv) knowledge is information whose validity has been established through tests

of proof (Liebeskind, 1996:94).

Despite the vibrant research in the stream of organizational knowledge, this body of work is

mainly concerned with 'understanding the nature of knowledge as an asset or a stock' and has

'a more static view of knowledge' (Vera & Crossan, 2003:128). On the other hand, the field of

Organizational Learning takes a dynamic view of knowledge and is concerned with how

knowledge [Link] put, Organizational Learning research asserts that learning is a

process that creates and develops knowledge (an outcome), which influences further learning

(Vera & Crossan, 2003).

1.10 Knowledge Management - An Organizational Learning Perspective

Organizational learning has received increased attention from researchers and practitioners

alike as a means of addressing how firms respond to rapidly changing environments (Crossan

& Guatto, 1996). Many researchers suggest that the only sustainable competitive advantage

may be an organization's ability to learn faster than its competitors (DeGeus, 1988; Stata,

1989). Several research models and frameworks explain how learning occurs at the

individual, group and organizational level. Notable among the organizational learning models

are: single-loop and double-loop learning (Argyris & Schon, 1978), exploitationexploration

(March, 1991), and information acquisition, information distribution, information

interpretation, and organizational memory (Huber, 1991).

1.11 The Importance of Knowledge Management

The realization of the value of knowledge assets is essential for business executives. Today's

businesses must position themselves within these new economic realities; and leveraging

brainpower through KM is one way to start the process of change (Bassi & Van Buren, 2000;

Wah, 1999a). The business environment has become increasingly uncertain in recent years

because of economic downturn, wars, and unfamiliar diseases; therefore, the ability to

anticipate problems and to solve problems becomes valuable. A successful firm is one that

can live with uncertainties and incorporate them with knowledge resided within the

organization in the decision-making process. All firms make strategic decisions, but smart

decision-making lies at the heart of organizational knowledge and its management.

In addition, organizations have become bigger and more complicated over the past 25 years

(Knowles, 1996). This trend has been a source of competitive advantage to some firms, but it

has also caused great difficulties to others. It has led to a managerial information gap between

the overall corporate view of the organization and a detailed working knowledge of the

business at all levels. KM was introduced to fill this gap, with attempts to maximize

organizational performance using an effective and efficient process. According to a report

"Employment and Growth in the Knowledge-based Economy" released by the Organization

for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD, 1996), more than 50 percent of the

Gross Domestic Product in major OECD countries was directly based on the production,

distribution and use of knowledge and information. Based on the findings, Wah (1999a)

further commented that there were four implications for these economies and other followers:

a) investment in knowledge can increase productivity and innovation; b) investment in

knowledge can lead to increasing returns; c) investment in knowledge can sustain long-term

economic growth; and d) knowledge does not depreciate in the same way that raw capital

does.

1.12 Knowledge Management as Strategic Management

KM is not only a management concept but also a management strategy or approach. KM and

strategic management are inseparable. According to Knowles (1996), to apply a strategy to an

organization implies that the organization's executives must try to allocate resources,

establish policies and procedures, assign responsibilities, and give directions to the

organization; and the strategy reflects the previously defined corporate mission and
objectives. The purpose of KM is to assist the leadership of an organization in helping it to

adapt continuously to its changing environment, so that it can enjoy a strong, growing and

long life in the marketplace. The fundamental task for executives is to enable the organization

to adapt to meet changing opportunities and threats. Thus, the managerial capabilities

possessed by executives play ansignificant role in the practice of KM; and leadership quality

gives KM an important role to play in strategic management.

1.13 Need for Knowledge Management (KM)

It is a well-known fact that knowledge of many is always better than individual excellence.

The following factors which lead to the recognition and growing importance of KM:

 The globalization of the economy, which is putting terrific pressure on firms for

increased adaptability, innovation and process speed.

 The awareness of value of specialized knowledge as embedded in organizational

process and routines, in coping with the above pressures.

 The awareness of knowledge as a distinct factor of production.

 Networked computing which enables us to work and learn with each other.

It is observed that the primary objective of KM is to convert human capital (individual

learning/ team capabilities) to structural capital (organizational knowledge such as

documented processes and knowledge bases) and thereby move from tacit to explicit

knowledge and reduce the risk of losing valuable knowledge if people leave the

organization.

1.14 Rationale
Knowledge management is growing as an important part of corporate strategy and

organization learning to take advantage of the competitive environment. This growing

importance is further increased by several developments in the field of information

technologies and communications networks.

Knowledge differs from the other resources as it multiplies itself by using and/or sharing it.

Companies which do not actively manage knowledge as a key resource will not be able to

sustain growth and competitiveness.

The SAIL is planning large expansions over the next few years and it is evident that one of

the key constraints to realise these expansions is not labour, land or capital but the

availability of knowledgeable personnel to drive the expansions. Based on the planned

expansions and new processes to be developed and implemented it can be assumed that

SAIL needed the relevant knowledge and skills to achieve its expansion targets.

It is evident that SAIL, the largest steel company in India, struggles to attract and retain

knowledgeable personnel to maintain its existing manufacturing facilities. The turnover of

skilled resources is high and it is very difficult to attract people especially to labour oriented

sites such as Blast Furnaces, Coke Ovens, and Steel Melting etc. The impact of this is that

knowledge is lost and very difficult and in many cases not possible to replace over the short

to medium term. It is also evident that the retaining of skills has been identified as one of the

top business risks of SAIL.

It is evident that knowledge and specifically tacit knowledge is a prerequisite for

sustainability and growth. Explicit knowledge can be acquired, but based on the SAIL

experience; people with experience or tacit knowledge are very scarce and need to be

nurtured. Hence, it needs to look in to the effective Knowledge Management practices which

was lead to improvement in intellectual capital of SAIL required as competitive edge for

sustainable growth.

The rationale behind this dissertation is to investigate, by means of a qualitative analysis,

that the link between knowledge management and organisational effectiveness can generate

a real competitive advantage in the modern business world.

1.15 Objectives

 To study and analyze various Knowledge Management practices and principles of

R&D organizations and specifically at R&D unit of Steel Authority of India Limited

(SAIL) located in Ranchi.

 To explore and identify a literature study to research the different aspects of KM

through literature study with emphasis on the relationships between organisational

learning, culture, sustainable growth and competitiveness.

 To examine how different KM strategies, influence organizational performance.

 To understand the moderating effects of KM strategies towards organizational

performance.

1.16 Research Methodology

Research Design
This study was focus on principles and practices of KM, Culture and Organisational Learning

concepts to assess the maturity level of KM within the SAIL and in particular to RDCIS of

SAIL, Ranchi. The study was limited to primary sources of information gained from the steel

industry in India, with specific reference to the SAIL. Secondary sources of information

werelimited to those generally available on the Internet and of literature sources.

The empirical study was focused on SAIL and more specifically to R & D Centre of SAIL,

Ranchi. The scope will include all researchers, managers, engineers, technologist, technicians

and specialists across all functions.

Conceptual framework

Goh (2005) illustrated the understanding of the management of Knowledge Innovation (KI)

and showed the appearance of Knowledge Management as a potent source of competitive

advantage. Innovation management should not be examined as distinct from Knowledge

Management, but instead must engage in ideas on how to channel Knowledge Management

practices for executing Innovation management processes.

The researchers have started approaching Knowledge Management from a cultural viewpoint,

based on studies of the relations among people within a social (i.e., their work) environment

(Blackler, 2000). Gupta and Govindarajan (2000) describe social environment as a ‘social

system’, or Organizational Culture, in which people operate.

Nature and Source of data & data collection.

Both primary and secondary sources of information was used during the study. The student

was use qualitative method of a case study with few interviews in total with managers and

engineers of the case company’s R&D department in this research to collect primary data.

The reason why I have chosen this type of interviewing is because I want rich, detailed

answers from the interviewees. This requires flexibility and freedom for the interviewee to

ramble or go off at tangents so that the authors can pick out the most important information

and use it in this research. Primary data is qualitative in nature. Secondary sources from

publications and text books was used to study the different KM principles. The secondary

source of information planned are company’s Annual reports, in-house magazines and

journals, employee feedback sheets, reference books and materials, articles of newspapers,

websites of companies, research reports of consultants and academicians etc. Primary

information was also gathered by means of an empirical study. A quantitative research

approach was used in order to be able to provide an objective base to meet the research

objectives. Questionnaires was distributed to the relevant researchers, managers and

specialists within different steel plants, R&D Centre of SAIL. Observations and formal /

informal / structured and unstructured interviews was also be used for generation of primary

data. Judgmental sampling was being used for survey through questionnaire and interview,

data analysis, statistical and regression analysis.

Data Handling and Analysis

The main target group of the study was on the management and technical staff from major

two/three knowledge based SAIL units in Ranchi and more specifically at RDCIS. The scope

included all managers, engineers, technologists, technicians and specialists across all

functions. The population is F to C role managers and specialists. The sample shall cover a
broad spectrum of participants with mixed culture, gender and work experience at various

levels within the organisations. i.e., R & D Centre for Iron and Steel (RDCIS), of SAIL in

Ranchi. The sample size of the respondent was 100.

The following other knowledge based SAIL units at Ranchi along with RDCIS are also shall

be considered in data sampling and analysis for larger data:

 Centre for Engineering and Technology (CET) of SAIL in Ranchi

 Management Training Institute (MTI) of SAIL in Ranchi

Both Qualitative and Quantitative approach shall be used in the study. In the Qualitative

research of subjective approach, the individuals’ interpretation of events was collected; i.e.,

the participant observation during an in-depth interview is important.

In the Quantitative research of objective approach, analysis of data such as words (as from

interviews), pictures (such as video), or objects will be collected. This method seeks precise

measurement and analysis of target concepts. It is planned to use tools such as surveys and

questionnaires for gathering the data needed.

A quantitative approach was also preferred in order to objectively meet the research

objectives. The intent was to get the maximum number of responses possible within the

timeframe available.
Chapter - 2
Literature
Review
2.0 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1 Introduction

This chapter endeavors to cogitate on the principal concepts of the research objective by

examining and reviewing existing literature in the context of research topic. The term

literature review refers to a variety of different forms of commentary on existing knowledge.

In its raw form literature is any source of recognized information. At the core of any

literature review are works that appear as books or journal articles which represent the

systematic communication of scholarly knowledge. Fink (2005,p3) defines a literature

review as a systematic, explicit, and reproducible method for identifying, evaluating, and

synthesizing the existing body of completed and recorded work produced by researchers,

scholars and practitioners and it upon this basis that the literature review is focused and

conducted.

2.2 Review of literatures: Knowledge Management, Competitive

Advantage and Human Capital
Implications of National Culture on Knowledge Management: A Cross

CulturalAnalysis of Italian and American Perceptions, Francesco de Leo 2009

Abstract: This research focuses on the differences and similarities between Italian and

American workers’ beliefs, expectations, and practices of knowledge management and how

these relate to Hofstede’s national culture dimensions. This study is part of a multi-country

set of research studies, undertaken by The George Washington University’s Institute for

Knowledge and Innovation, aimed at understanding how KM may be influenced by national

culture. For continuity and comparative purposes, we replicate a previous study, which
compared KM perceptions between American and Taiwanese knowledge workers (Wang

2004). The subjects of our study are Italian and American employees and managers expected

to be involved in KM activities at all levels. Statistical comparisons on the 474 study

participants (237 from each country) do not show statistically significant differences between

Italian and American perceptions of knowledge management beliefs, expectations and

practices. Both countries gave a relatively high importance score to all factors believed to

contribute to successful knowledge management initiatives. Similarly, consensus was found

on the expected benefits such initiatives bring to an organization. Comparably lower scores

were recorded on the actual implementation of KM best practices by the participants’

organizations. For individual variables within our constructs where differences are observed

between the two countries, we propose empirical evidence that high uncertainty avoidance

traits of the Italian society may explain such differences. This research provides insights

which will help companies or units within a company select KM tools and practices that are

more likely to succeed in the national culture setting in which these are to be implemented.

Predicting Inter-Organizational Knowledge Satisfaction through Knowledge

Conversion and Task Characteristics in a Minority-Owned Business, Terrence L. Ward

2009

Abstract: Knowledge management has been extensively studied from the single organization

(intra organizational) perspective for many years. Although the literature on intra

organizational knowledge is extensive, there still exist gaps in the literature with regards to

knowledge being shared by multiple organizations (inter-organizational knowledge). Inter-

organizational knowledge satisfaction is gained when the organizations successfully embody

the knowledge gained via the cooperation and crystallizes that knowledge within the
organization. The problem addressed in this study is the lack of a model for predicting inter-

organizational knowledge satisfaction utilizing task characteristics and the knowledge

conversion process. The purpose of the study was to predict inter organizational knowledge

satisfaction for a contract company. The research question addressed how task characteristic

and knowledge conversion can predict inter organizational knowledge satisfaction. The

theoretical frameworks include Nonaka’s theory on organizational knowledge creation and

Becerra-Fernandez and Sabherwal’s theory for task characteristics. The study is a correlation

research design using multiple linear regressions as the data analysis method. An online

questionnaire was administered to all executives, first- and mid-level managers, and

professionals. The predictor variables task characteristic and knowledge conversion are used

to predict inter organizational knowledge satisfaction (IOKS). Predictor variables accounted

for 35.3% of the variance in the IOKS score. This study contributes to social change by

helping organizations gain a competitive advantage through developing and implementing

both creative and timely knowledge management initiatives to gain inter-organizational

knowledge satisfaction.

Assessing the Collaborative Knowledge Management of the Market Dominant

Organization, Jacob Olusola Ogunlade 2009

Abstract: Dominant firms enjoy economic strengths which enable them to compete

effectively in relevant markets through the use of collaborative knowledge management

(CKM). While the literature is replete with general guiding principles for companies to adopt

successful business strategies, there is very limited empirical research on effectively using

CKM to improve company performance and market domination. The purpose of this study

was to evaluate strategies for information sharing by companies to achieve better operations
management and control, a wider range of customers, and stronger competitive edge in the

global economy. Epistemological foundation for the study was provided by the literature on

knowledge management and organizational dynamics. Data were collected by an

electronically self-administered questionnaire on a convenience sample of 80 employees of

three small businesses in Memphis, Tennessee. A quantitative method using Poisson

regression was applied to test the hypotheses about relationships between six independent

variables of value proposition, culture building, responsibilities, information technology,

approaches and assessment and the dependent variable, collaborative knowledge

management. Results indicate that value proposition, information technology, and building an

organizational culture of responsibilities and best practices play significant roles in effective

CKM. Social change implications of the study suggest that high-intensity collaborative

knowledge management would produce creative leaders and workers, improved leader-

worker collaboration, and more effective use of information technologies in organizational

intelligence and decision making.

Utilization of Knowledge Management in Improving Information Technology

Investment Return: A Qualitative Study, Nurul S. Aman 2009

Abstract:The challenge of exploring innovative ways to evaluating the return on information

technology (IT) investments has opened a new era of conducting research opportunities

where information asymmetry (IA) was examined. Effort was made to explore the

effectiveness of knowledge management systems (KMS) to maximize the rate of investments

(ROI) for IT deliverables. The study focused on the investigation of the key research

question, how can the use of KMS as an integral part of IT strategic management improve

benefits and return such as ROI? While prior research identified several areas addressing the
role of KMS, there was little evidence of the integration of tacit and explicit knowledge types

of KM for exploring the effectiveness of KMS to improve ROI. This study employed a

qualitative research method to identify relevant IT deliverables and KMS actions to evaluate

the possible outcome by integrating tacit and explicit knowledge. The study considered five

KMS effectiveness factors: information quality, service quality, user involvement, user

motivation, and user satisfaction. An iterative process of qualitative analysis was utilized

through a coding mechanism to capture the events in a textual form of data analysis. A

qualitative text and content analysis was used to categorize the IT deliverables and their

relationship with KMS effectiveness factors and KMS actions. The results of data collection

and the analyses revealed a strong link between KMS effectiveness factors and the outcomes

of IT investments. To minimize the potential biases, information was collected from multiple

sources of secondary data. The textual data checklists revealed that successful

implementation of KMS effectiveness could overcome the problem of adverse selection and

moral hazard. In the field of information economics, minimizing the problems of adverse

selection and moral hazard had been the focus of discussion for the last 40 years. This study

has contributed the results from integration of tacit and explicit knowledge for KMS

effectiveness that minimizes the problem of IA in maximizing the investment return for IT

organizations. The limitations of qualitative research and the scope of future research in both

qualitative and quantitative were illustrated and discussed in this paper as well.

Organizational Culture and Knowledge Management in the Electric Power Generation

Industry, Robert D. Mayfield 2008

Abstract: Scarcity of knowledge and expertise is a challenge in the electric power generation

industry. Today’s most pervasive knowledge issues result from employee turnover and the
constant movement of employees from project to project inside organizations. To address

scarcity of knowledge and expertise, organizations must enable employees to capture,

transfer, and use mission critical explicit and tacit knowledge. The purpose of this qualitative

grounded theory research was to examine the relationship between and among organizations

within the electric power generation industry developing knowledge management processes

designed to retain, share, and use the industry, institutional, and technical knowledge upon

which the organizations depend. The research findings show that knowledge management is a

business problem within the domain of information systems and management. The risks

associated with losing mission critical-knowledge can be measured using metrics on

employee retention, recruitment, productivity, training and benchmarking. Certain enablers

must be in place in order to engage people, encourage cooperation, create a knowledge-

sharing culture, and, ultimately change behavior. The research revealed the following change

enablers that support knowledge management strategies: (a) training – blended learning, (b)

communities of practice, (c) cross-functional teams, (d) rewards and recognition programs,

(e) active senior management support, (f) communication and awareness, (g) succession

planning, and (h) team organizational culture.

Capturing Institutional Knowledge: will current Best Practices Work for Small Public

Utilities in Pennsylvania? Liesel M. Adam 2008

Abstract: Providing safe drinking water is a vital service for the community and is one of the

most important quality-of-life issues in the United States today. Water utilities are faced with

enormous pressures to replace aging infrastructure, meet increasingly stringent regulatory

requirements, protect water resources from contamination and depletion, and to do all this

while meeting the public’s increasing customer-service expectations and demands to keep
user rates as low as possible. While water systems are regulated at the federal level, service is

provided at the local level. In the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, this work is most often

completed through the careful work of very small organizations. Career water utility

professionals have been doing this job very well since the regulatory boom of the 1970s

brought a large number of employees into the industry, predominantly Baby Boomers born

between 1946 and 1964. Now, many of these career professionals are approaching retirement

age. How these small- and medium-sized utilities can address the risk associated with

employees who hold prominent level of critical knowledge retiring en masse over the next

several years is the focus of this preliminary research. First, a survey of water utilities from

across the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania was conducted to discover workforce

demographics and the utilities’ level of awareness and preparedness to address this risk. In

addition, five water utility case studies were conducted to provide a more in-depth look at the

solutions that have already been researched by large organizations, such as global

corporations and federal agencies, to determine their applicability to small- and medium-

sized water utilities in Pennsylvania. The results present a hopeful message that small

organizations may be equipped to address these risks if some simple guidance and tools are

made available, focusing on streamlined analysis and planning activities and fostering an

organizational culture that supports knowledge-sharing activities and the transfer of critical

knowledge between employees through face-to-face interactions. However, to adequately

address all the needs small- and medium sized utilities face, funding for human resources

(HR) activities must be made available in an environment that has traditionally not included

in-house HR staffing. Absent funding for these activities, utilities will need to consider

collaborative programs or even alternative arrangements for the provision of safe drinking
water within their region as their staff’s bank of institutional knowledge shrinks due to high

employee turnover, or face the consequences of their failure to act.

Knowledge Sharing in a Human Resource Community of Practice, James D. White

2007

Abstract: Past research and anecdotal evidence have shown that knowledge workers can

provide organizations with a competitive advantage. Yet many knowledge management

projects end without achieving stated goals, in part because of an inadequate understanding of

how knowledge is shared. The purpose of this study was to explore how ten members of a

large retail organization’s human resource department perceive their knowledge-sharing

experiences. Grounded in the hermeneutical phenomenology of Heidegger and Gadamer, a

case study was completed. Data were collected from participant interviews, and content

analysis was completed using thematic coding to reveal common themes. Three major

knowledge-sharing themes emerged: openness as a knowledge-sharing enabler, a personal

construct of trust, and a preferred oral tradition. Specifically, the department’s senior

manager enabled knowledge sharing by adopting openness and combining it with personal

reflection. Translating a rich oral tradition to an online collaborative environment, however,

proved to be difficult. This is especially important, since finding ways to reinforce the use of

oral tradition to share knowledge is critical as more and more organizations depend upon

virtual teams. For managers looking to gain the potential advantages offered by knowledge

workers, the results of this study reinforce the need to establish a management model

embodying the elements of openness and trust. Enabling knowledge sharing and oral tradition

through technology requires additional research to determine the best method of fostering

collaboration. From a social perceptive, the use of this model and development of supporting

technology could increase organization performance and improve employee satisfaction.

Organizational Characteristics, Knowledge Management Strategy, Enablers, and

Process Capability: Knowledge Management Performance in U.S. Software Companies,

Hsin Jung Hsieh 2007

Abstract: Currently, the effect of knowledge management has not been clearly defined or

understood and a proper framework for assessing the status of knowledge management is

lacking. Most studies examined the relationships among critical factors of knowledge

management separately and the empirical research is based on only a few cases or small

samples where generalizing the results is significantly reduced. The development of a

universal model is necessary as a means to measure relevant constructs. This co relational

(explanatory) online survey research is the first to explore the relationships among

organizational characteristics, knowledge management strategy, knowledge management

enablers, knowledge management process capabilities, and knowledge management

performance. Two research questions and 14 hypotheses and related sub-hypotheses were

examined. The survey consisted of an 8-item Knowledge Management Strategy Scale, a 26-

item modified Knowledge Management Enablers Scale, a 27-item Knowledge Management

Process Capability Scale, and a 5-item Knowledge Management Scale. Using a simple

random sampling plan, 212 participants from U.S software companies completed an online

survey. Multiple regression, moderated multiple regression, and two-way ANOVA were used

to analyze the data. Of the 14 hypotheses and sub-hypotheses, ten were supported, one was

partially supported, and three were not supported. Findings indicated that (a) system

orientation and human orientation strategies are significant positive explanatory variables of

knowledge management process capability, knowledge management enablers, and knowledge

management performance; (b) technology and organizational culture of knowledge

management enablers are significant positive explanatory variables of knowledge

management process capability and knowledge management performance; (c) the

decentralization dimension may inversely affect knowledge management process capability

and knowledge management performance; (d) annual sales in dollars was a significant

positive explanatory variable of knowledge management strategy and knowledge

management process capability; (e) knowledge management process capability is a mediator

between knowledge management strategy and organizational characteristics, and knowledge

management performance; and (f) companies with a balance of a high degree of human

orientation and system orientation strategies have a positive significant relationship with

knowledge management performance. The limitations of the study regarding generalization,

and recommendations for future research to replicate the study in other countries, are also

included.

Knowledge Management Repositories: Supporting Knowledge Work and Activity in

Organizations, William Voon 2007

Abstract: The aim of this dissertation is to report on how organizations leverage their

knowledge during their mission-critical activities. It seeks to answer questions such as the

forms or genres by which knowledge is expressed and the interactions among organizational

members that bring about knowledge explication and sharing. Another area of focus is the

activities and tasks that members engage in when they experience the need for knowledge

seeking or sharing, specifically, interactions with repositories of knowledge objects. This

dissertation relied on a multi-methods approach to look at knowledge phenomena in

organizations. Such an approach was relevant because it enabled the researcher to look at

knowledge activities from different perspectives, ranging from that of Chief Knowledge
Officers to that of Knowledge Management community users. Thus, a two-stage survey was

employed as it allowed the researcher to target the appropriate question to the right

respondent. Use of in-depth interviews provided further insights to the knowledge practices

of some of the organizations. The findings of this dissertation suggest that culture is still a

crucial factor in promoting the sharing of knowledge. Technology use and adoption is another

factor that organizations may need to consider, as the nurturing of online knowledge

communities appears to be a major strategy for engaging in tacit knowledge sharing. Access

to relevant knowledge objects was found to be a major factor influencing knowledge

contribution behaviors. This research relied on some instruments that had been validated

previously to measure the concepts of organizational culture and technology adoption. The

results of this research provide additional validation for the use of those instruments.

Knowledge Management and Intellectual Capital, Hsiu-Yueh (Sonya) Hsu 2006

Abstract: Neoclassical economics brings up the importance of knowledge and “capital” to

the business processes. Followed the stream of the importance of knowledge and capital, this

current research attempts to clarify the intertwined properties between intellectual capital (IC)

and knowledge management (KM), and at the same time, establish an integrated framework

for either IC or KM fields. With very little information about KM practices in the United

States, this research investigated KM with a process perspective and its relationship to IC.

The focus is to examine the effects of human capital and innovation capital on organizational

effectiveness, accounting for the mediation of knowledge process capabilities and structural

capital with organizational effectiveness in turn leading to a firm’s competitive advantage.

One hundred and twenty-five usable questionnaires were collected through an email and Web

survey method. Respondents to the questionnaire were middle to top managers who worked
in companies that held patents in various industries. Partial Least Squares was utilized to

estimate the theoretical model; the unidimensionality, discriminate validity, convergent

validity, and reliability were also established. Four out of six research hypotheses were

supported by the results, and they were: • Human capital had an indirect effect on

organizational effectiveness via the paths of knowledge management process capability; •

Human capital had an indirect effect on organizational effectiveness via the paths of

structural capital; • Knowledge process capability had a positive effect on organizational

effectiveness; • Organizational effectiveness had a positive influence on organizational

competitive advantage. The hypotheses related to innovation capital were not supported by

the model estimation and path analyses. However, the revised model opened up three

significant paths when one path: from innovation capital to human capital was added. These

three paths supported the position that innovation capital was facilitated by human capital.

Several contributions of this research project were realized. First, an integrated model of KM

and IC was empirically tested. Second, emergent KM processes as enablers of organizational

effectiveness and the relationship with other IC components, including human networks,

knowledge infrastructure, and organization configuration, were established. Third, the

importance of innovation capital and its potential influence on organizational performance

and competitive advantage was investigated and could be important to further academic

research and organizational practitioners. A revised model was presented that may lead to

future research in this area.

The Leveraging Effects of Knowledge Management Concepts In the Deployment of Six

Sigma in a Health Care Company, Dirk Stevens 2006

Abstract: Health care costs and quality problems continue to emerge. These are significant

problems that negatively impact the quality of life for thousands. In response, health care

organizations have invested in disciplined methodologies, including Six Sigma; yet many of

these deployments have failed. Failures may partially rest with the ineffective sharing of

knowledge. Despite this critical link, there is almost no academic research coupling

knowledge sharing with the deployment of disciplined methodologies. Using a case study of

a health care company, the research question addressed whether key knowledge management

concepts had a positive or negative effect on the Six Sigma deployment. The research

included interviews with key participants, review of historical documents, and evaluation of

selected Six Sigma projects representing high, medium, and low returns-on-investments. The

results showed high return-on-investment projects were more likely to effectively use

knowledge management concepts including mentoring, location of experts, communities of

practice, and networking, whereas low return projects did not. Information technology played

a lesser role. Four general themes emerged: knowledge management can positively leverage

the outcome of Six Sigma, individuals will develop their own methods for sharing knowledge

in the absence of a structured system, disciplined knowledge management approaches yield

improved results, and there are critical protocols that must be followed to ensure a successful

Six Sigma deployment. An additional outcome of the research was the development of a

model for coupling Six Sigma and knowledge management. Based on three pillars, the model

proposes organizations follow well-established Six Sigma protocols (e.g. project contracts),

use key processes (e.g. just-in-time training), and deploy a supportive knowledge

management system. From a social change perspective, the case study demonstrated the

positive value of combining Six Sigma with knowledge management. The company

experienced significant cost savings and improvements in product quality. Beyond these
immediate benefits, the research offers model that other organisations can use to facilitate

higher quality products and lower costs. The positive impact to the health of thousands of

patients is significant.

Antecedents and Impacts of Knowledge Management Practices Supported by

Information Technology: An Empirical Study in Manufacturing Context, Shahnawaz

Muhammed 2006

Abstract: In the current economy, organizations increasingly view knowledge as a critical

component of their competitive advantage. However, except for anecdotal and case based

illustrations of the value of viewing organizational competitiveness from a knowledge based

perspective, there is little large-scale empirical evidence to support these claims. It is also

widely recognized that individuals within the organization are the basic elements and the

source of organizational knowledge. Despite this, it has become common to view knowledge

management as an organizational or group level phenomenon, and the question of how

individuals who constitute the group and organization manage what they know has received

relatively little attention in the literature. Drawing on behavioral and learning theories, this

research investigates numerous factors that impact how individuals manage their knowledge,

and how such extended behaviors influence the outcomes that are commonly attributed to

their better management of knowledge. This research focuses on these individual behaviors in

the context of information technology supported knowledge work since today’s knowledge

work is substantially integrated with diverse information technologies. A manufacturing

related environment is chosen to test the proposed hypotheses because of a wide variety of

work settings and information technologies available in this context. Following a pre-test and

pilot, large-scale analysis utilized data collected from 252 individuals. The results of the
analysis suggest that cognitive effort involved in their work, empowerment and information

technology support available significantly impact the individuals’ knowledge management

practice. Other work characteristics such as virtualness of work and slack time available did

not have a significant direct impact on their knowledge management practice. Virtualness,

however, contributed to the degree to which the work would be perceived as cognitively

demanding. The three dimensions of community of practice also did not have a significant

direct impact on the respondent’s knowledge management practices. The structural and

cognitive aspects, however, had a significant impact on the relational dimension. Further,

consistent with other cognitive theories, the relational dimension influenced individuals’

knowledge management practices through their cognitive empowerment. Greater engagement

in various knowledge management practices by these individuals led to increased task related

knowledge and better performance.

An Examination of the Effects of Cultural, Climatic, Structural, and Technological

Factors on Knowledge Management Effectiveness, Todd Allen Peachey 2006

Abstract: This study examined the effects of culture, climate, intrinsic motivators, structure

and technological capabilities on knowledge management effectiveness when structure is

moderated by technological capabilities. Knowledge workers were surveyed to collect data

on their perceptions of culture, climate, structure and technological capabilities within the

organization. Partial Least Squares Modeling was used to analyze the data. This research

found evidence that climatic factors including fairness and affiliation, in addition to intrinsic

motivators and technology, affect knowledge management effectiveness.

Determinants of Knowledge Sharing Behaviors: Developing and Testing an Integrated

Theoretical Model, Anitha Chennamaneni, 2006

Abstract: Knowledge sharing has been identified as the key enabler of knowledge

management. To leverage knowledge resources and to support knowledge sharing,

organizations are employing knowledge management systems. While knowledge

management systems are important, practical implementations have found that technology

alone cannot guarantee that knowledge will be shared. The objective of this research study

was to examine factors that promote or discourage knowledge sharing behaviors of

knowledge workers in the organizational context. Drawing from multiple streams of research

including social psychology, organizational learning, knowledge management, information

systems and so forth, this research developed an integrated theoretical model and unveiled

three sets of critical factors: psychological, organizational and technological that are believed

to affect the knowledge sharing behaviors. The posited theoretical model was validated using

a field survey of knowledge workers. The results of the study provide empirical support for

the overall structure theorized in the research model. 11 of the 12 hypothesized relationships

were supported. Knowledge sharing behavior was predicted by the knowledge workers

intention towards knowledge sharing and perceived behavioral control. Knowledge sharing

intention in turn was predicted by knowledge workers attitude towards knowledge sharing,

subjective norm and perceived behavioral control. The knowledge workers perceptions of

reciprocity, reputation, enjoyment in helping others were positively associated with favorable

attitude towards knowledge sharing. The perceptions of loss of knowledge power exerted a

negative effect on the attitude. Organizational climate positively influenced knowledge

workers subjective norm. Additionally, facilitating tools and technology was positively

associated with elevated levels of perceived behavioral control towards knowledge sharing.
Based on the findings, the study discussed implications for theory and practice. Overall, the

results of the study advance prior research in the area of knowledge sharing by shedding light

on the determinants of knowledge sharing behaviors of knowledge workers. In addition to

contributing to theory, the findings of the study also yield insights for practice. These insights

could be used by organizations in developing realistic environments that are conducive to

knowledge sharing.

Harnessing Intellectual Capital: A Study of Organizational Knowledge Transfer,

Terrence P. McGill 2006

Abstract: This study, using mixed methods, explores the relationships among types of

knowledge transfer channels and the transfer of various forms/components of intellectual

capital by individuals within an organization. Using a grounded theory approach and multiple

linear regressions, this study investigated operational descriptions of intellectual capital types

and the knowledge transfer channels used to effectively transfer them, as well as relationships

among them in the specific setting of a Department of Defense field activity. Twenty-three

individuals from across the organization participated in qualitative study interviews and one-

hundred and thirteen individuals from the same organization completed a self-administered

webbased survey for the quantitative study. Prior to this study, most knowledge transfer and

intellectual capital research has been theoretical in nature, and was found to fall short of

explaining the relationships between the two bodies of knowledge. This study has

implications for both theory and practice, as it provides a beginning to understand the

relationships among knowledge transfer mechanisms and intellectual capital types, thereby

extending the two bodies of knowledge and establishing a connection between them.

Regression analyses were used to examine the hypotheses advanced from the qualitative
findings. The analyses suggest that within the Federal organization the effectiveness of a

knowledge transfer channel used to exchange intellectual capital between individuals within

the organization is dependent on the type of intellectual capital being transferred. The

analyses also suggest that the perceived effectiveness of knowledge transfer mechanisms for

exchanging intellectual capital is influenced by demographic and organizational factors,

among others, signaling that solutions for addressing intellectual capital transfer within an

organization should consider the diversity of the variables influencing the intellectual capital

transfer process. This research is essentially a building block for both theory and practice.

Future researchers are provided with the basis for the relationship in a practical setting.

Practitioners are provided with operationalized descriptions of intellectual capital types and

the knowledge transfer channels used to effectively transfer them.

Knowledge Integration in Software Teams: An Analysis of Team, Project, and IT-

Related Issues, Nikhil Mehta 2006

Abstract: Contemporary organizations are increasingly depending on teambased structures

to strategically consolidate their dispersed knowledge resources. Team members possess

diverse knowledge resources, and these have to be combined with knowledge from external

sources to achieve project goals. Teams achieve this objective by integrating knowledge from

external sources and blending it with the skills, know-how, and expertise of the team

members. Software teams are an appropriate example of the importance of team-level

knowledge integration. Multiple project stakeholders, within and outside the team, possess

diverse portfolios of requisite know-how, skills, and abilities and teams must integrate them

to develop a timely and workable solution. Prior research suggests that software teams carry

out two types of knowledge integration - external integration and internal integration. The
aim of this study is to examine the influence of various team, project, and it related

antecedents on these two categories of knowledge integration in software teams. Team-

related issues include teams’ knowledge heterogeneity, relational capital, and boundary-

buffering processes. Project-related issues include project uncertainty and project

interdependence. IT-usage is examined in a moderating capacity. A research model

connecting various categories of antecedents to the two types of knowledge integration was

tested by collecting data on 300 projects in nine mid- to large-sized CMM Level 5 software

firms. The respondents provided information in light of the most successful project and the

least successful project they had experienced. PLS latent variable modeling was used to

analyze the data. Two separate analyses were conducted: First, the combined sample of 300

projects was examined to test the research hypotheses; and second, separate analyses were

conducted on 150 most successful projects and the same number of least successful ones. The

findings of this study support the influence of a number of team-, project-, and IT related

issues on external as well as internal knowledge integration in software teams. Among team-

related issues, knowledge heterogeneity, relational capital, and sentry processes significantly

improved knowledge integration, while guard processes had a negative impact on external

knowledge integration. Among project-related antecedents, project uncertainty had a

significantly negative influence on both internal as well as external knowledge integration,

while project interdependence significantly improved external knowledge integration.

Interestingly, IT-usage did not moderate the influence of either team- or project-related issues

on internal knowledge integration, but significantly improved the influence of these issues on

external knowledge integration. These results provide scholars with a foundation for future

research in developing a robust knowledge integration framework. Interesting implications

are also in offering for practitioners.

Knowledge Management and Task Characteristics, Worapa Anothayanon 2006

Abstract: This study investigates knowledge transfer types that are most frequently adopted

by employees who have different tasks in an organization. As the context of contemporary

organizations becomes extremely complicated, effective management of knowledge becomes

critical in gaining and sustaining competitiveness. The importance of effectively transferring

knowledge can help organizations gain knowledge capital, productivity, and performance. It

is proposed that the four knowledge transfer types are effectively adopted by four different

task situations: i.e., socialization by craft, externalization by non routine, combination by

engineering and internalization by routine. The research was conducted at a local university

using Quantitative Methodology along with a survey instrument. Data were collected from

157 college alumni, who represented several types of task situations. Results of the data

analyses confirmed that the proposed knowledge transfer types were matched with the

anticipated task situations with the exception of the non routine group. The findings also

revealed that the socialization and internalization types significantly contributed to

knowledge transfer and only the socialization type positively contribute to knowledge

creation. Further research is needed to advance the area of the non-routine task situation and

to intensively investigate in an organization. For a crucial positive social impact, knowledge

gained from this study will help organizations in planning effective knowledge transfer,

which will result in gaining organizational knowledge wealth, increasing revenues,

decreasing budgets, improving human resources, and transforming organizations into

knowledge generation enterprises.

Integrating Knowledge Management into Market Orientation: Impact on Hotel

Performance, Chien Chun Lun, Grace 2006

Abstract: Recent research on managing knowledge has focused on its measurement. The

aims of this study were to develop a measurement scale for the assessment of knowledge

management (KM) strategy implementation and to test a KM model incorporating market

orientation (MO) capabilities and organizational performance (OP). By placing KM research

within a hotel context, the research explored new paths for understanding the nature of KM

practices in the hotel industry. Specifically, it proposed that MO capabilities might integrate

with the management practice of modern approaches of KM strategies in enhancing the

delivery component of OP. The purpose of the study was to investigate the linkage between

MO capabilities, KM strategies, and hotel performance. This study focused on the

investigation of hotels in Taiwan at a property level. The study not only aimed at the

development of a KM measurement scale for hotel use, but also empirically examined

whether or not KM strategies were an essential function of enhancing a firm's performance

by properly aligning MO capabilities. Therefore, objectives of the study were to: 1) develop

and validate an instrument for the assessment of KM strategy implementation in the hotel

industry; 2) examine the implementation of KM strategies in the hotel industry; 3) revalidate

an existing MO scale in a hotel context; and 4) examine the relationships between MO, KM,

and hotel performance. This study employed a mixture of qualitative and quantitative

methods. Two stages of a qualitative research, focus group discussions and expert reviews,

were involved, followed by a quantitative survey research. The study mainly followed the

procedures suggested by Churchill (1979), Gerbing and Anderson (1988), and Hair,

Anderson, Tatham, and Black (2002) in scale development and measurement purification.

The final KM measurement model contained 24 items for hotel use. The 20-item MARKOR
scale was also revalidated in the hotel context, with a total of 15 items being retained in the

final scale. It was found that the surveyed hotels possessed superior MO capabilities over

implementation of KM strategies. The proposed model included only one exogenous

variable: MO capabilities. The two endogenous variables were KM strategies and hotel

performance. Three hotel performance models were investigated: overall hotel performance,

a hotel's room performance, and a hotel's food and beverage performance. Both subjective

and objective measures of hotel performance were obtained. Subjective measures were

obtained through the survey, while objective measures were obtained from secondary data.

Overall hotel performance was measured by combining four self-evaluation items of

profitability, size of company, market share and speed of growth in the past three years

compared to those of key competitors. On a 7-point Likert-type scale, respondents tended to

rate their hotel performance better than their competitors (M> 4.00). Room performance was

assessed through an input-output analysis of yield statistics; and "the average food and

beverage revenue per square meter" was used to explore the contribution of food and

beverage revenue in a hotel. Results indicated that both a) room and b) food and beverage

performances varied to a great extent among surveyed hotels. The average yield statistics

from 2001 to 2003 was .30 and the average food and beverage revenue per square meter per

year during the same period was US$2,166. Results were consistent across all three final full

structure models. Analyses of Structural Equation Modeling supported the validity and

reliability of the KM and MO measurements developed and tested in this study. In addition,

significant relationships from MO to KM and from MO to hotel performance were supported.

However, MO was found not to have an indirect effect on hotel performance. In other words,

KM did not have a direct effect on hotel performance. The mediating role of KM was not

applicable in all three final full structure models. Although the effect of KM on hotel
performance was not evident across all three performance models in the full structure

analysis, four sets of the hypotheses were supported in the individual path analysis with latent

variables. Results of the individual path analysis with latent variables indicated that three

significant causal relationships, from KM to hotel performance, from MO to hotel

performance, and from MO to KM, were evident in all three performance models. The

mediating role of KM on the effect of hotel performance was also supported in the individual

path analysis with latent variables. Results of the present study demonstrated that different

analysis methods would lead to different results. Thus, one of the academic contributions of

this study was a methodological implication. The researcher called for caution in the use of

Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). Future researchers should be aware of the differences

between a full structure model analysis and an individual path analysis with latent variables

when adopting a SEM strategy. From the managerial perspective, findings gave clear

indications that would allow interested parties such as hotel operators, consultants, students,

and scholars to understand more about the implications of KM strategy implementation and

MO capabilities on hotel performance.

Antecedents and Effects of Information Technology Use in Emergent Knowledge

Process, Amy Chou 2006

Abstract: Technology advancement and global competition have driven the pace of the

business environment change. Inevitably knowledge workers have to make the business

decisions or design products/services under emerging and situated context. Markus et al.

(2002) describe Emergent knowledge processes (EKPs) are organizational activities that

exhibit three characteristics in combination: (1) deliberations with no best structure or

sequence, (2) knowledge requirements include both general and tacit knowledge distributed
across experts and nonexperts, and (3) highly unpredictable actor set in term of job role or

prior knowledge. Unlike in stable business process, knowledge workers in EKPs should rely

on more information technology to collaborate with other actors to solve problem and make

decision for unexpected situations. However, the knowledge work outcomes, such as new

idea, new interpretation, new processes, and productivity, can either be enhanced or

constrained by how knowledge workers use information technology. This research proposes a

causal model that suggests different factors, such as personal interpretative styles (Thomas

and Velthouse, 1990), communities of practice (Brown and Duguid, 1991), and interpretative

flexibility (Orlikowski, 1992), will influence user empowerment, which is an integrative

motivational concept based on different cognitive task assessments emerging from the

interaction of people, process and technology in virtual work (Doll et al. 2004). In turn, user

empowerment will affect the enactment of technology use for problem solving, decision

support, collaboration, and system reconfiguration. Consequently, the enacted technology use

will change the knowledge work outcomes, i.e. the frequency of generating new ideas, new

interpretations, new processes, and new artifacts as well as increasing productivity. Structural

equation model based on the sample of 211 knowledge workers support that (1) personal

interpretive styles and interpretive flexibility of technology have direct positive effects on

user empowerment and have positive indirect effects on enacted system use and knowledge

work outcomes; (2) user empowerment has direct positive effect on enacted system use and

indirect positive effect on knowledge work outcomes; and (3) enacted system use has positive

effects on knowledge work outcomes. However, communities of practice have no significant

effect on user empowerment.

Knowledge Competency Acquisition in the Knowledge Economy: Links to Firm

Performance, Robert Scott Macy 2006

Abstract: In the new knowledge, based economy competitive advantage comes not from

tangible capital, but through intangible (i.e. intellectual) capital. Human capital is an

important source of an organization's intellectual capital and the building block of

organizational knowledge and knowledge competencies. Given its importance, it would be

useful for managers to know how they should acquire their knowledge competencies. An

organization's knowledge competency acquisition system is a potential source of competitive

advantage. Prior research is divided between universalistic and contingency perspectives on

the best way for a firm to organize its knowledge competency acquisition system.

Researchers under the universalistic perspective see competitive advantage as an

implementation story in which organizations gain competitive advantage through superior

implementation of universalistic best practices — in this case an internalized knowledge

competency acquisition system. In contrast to the universalistic view of knowledge

competency acquisition, the contingency view indicates that increased effectiveness is

obtained via superior alignment between an organization's external task environment and its

organization's knowledge competency acquisition system. Under the contingency perspective

an organization should have a more internalized knowledge competency acquisition system

in more stable environments and a more externalized knowledge competency acquisition

system in more dynamic environments. Using the context of large law firms in the United

States the above two competing perspectives were tested using five years of panel data.

Results did not lend support to the universalistic perspective, but did lend support to the

contingency perspective. Results indicate that an organization's task environment moderates

the relationship between an organization's knowledge competency acquisition system and its
financial performance. Organizations in more stable environments which used more

internalized knowledge competency acquisitions systems outperformed those that were more

externalized, and organizations in more dynamic environments which used more externalized

knowledge competency acquisition systems outperformed those that were more internalized

2.3 Conclusion

This project work examines the issue of effective knowledge management from the

perspective of organizational capabilities. This perspective suggests that a knowledge

infrastructure consisting of technology, structure, and culture along with a knowledge process

architecture of acquisition, conversion, application, and protection are essential

organizational capabilities or "preconditions'" for effective knowledge management. (Gold et

al,2001)
 Chapter –3
Steel Authority of
India Limited (SAIL)
–A Profile
3.1 Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) – A Profile

Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) is the leading steel-making company in India. It is a

fully integrated iron and steel maker, producing both basic and special steels for domestic

construction, engineering, power, railway, automotive and defense industries and for sale in

export markets. SAIL is also among the seven Maharatnas of the country's Central Public

Sector Enterprises.

Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) is one of the largest state-owned steel making

company, with its HQ in New Delhi, India and one of the top steel makers in world,headed

by Shri P K Singh as Chairman. With an annual turnover of 43,337 crore (US$6.8 billion)

(FY 2015-16). It is a Public SectorUndertaking which trades publicly in the market is largely

owned by Government of India and acts like an operating company. Incorporated on 24

January 1973, SAIL has 79,601 employees (as of 01-Oct-2017) [3] With an annual

production of 14.38 million metric tons, SAIL is the 23rd largest steel producer in the world.
[4] The Hot Metal capacity of the Company will further increase and is expected to reach a

level of 23.5 million tonnes per annum by the end of the Financial Year 2015-16. SAIL

operates and owns 5 integrated steel plants at Bhilai, Rourkela, Durgapur, Bokaro and

Burnpur(Asansol) and 3 special steel plants at Salem, Durgapur and Bhadravathi. It also

owns a Ferro Alloy Plant at Chandrapur. As a part of its global ambition, the company is

undergoing a massive expansion and modernisation programme involving upgrading and

building new facilities with emphasis on state of the art green technology. SAIL is a public

sector company, owned and operated by the Government of India. According to a recent

survey, SAIL is one of India's fastest growing Public Sector Units. Besides, it has R&D

centre for Iron & Steel (RDCIS), Centre for Engineering and Technology (CET),

Management Training Institute (MTI) and SAIL Safety Organisation (SSO) located at

Ranchi, the capital of Jharkhand. As all knowledge based units of SAIL are located in

Ranchi, is considered as knowledge hub of SAIL.

SAIL manufactures and sells a broad range of steel products, including hot and cold rolled

sheets and coils, galvanised sheets, electrical sheets, structural, railway products, plates, bars

and rods, stainless steel and other alloy steels. SAIL produces iron and steel at five integrated

plants (Bhiali Steel Plant, Bokaro Steel Plant, Durgapur Steel Plant, Rourkela Steel Plant,

IISCO Steel Plant at Burnpur) and three special steel plants (Alloy Steels Plants (ASP) Salem

Steel Plant (SSP) in Tamil Nadu, Visvesvaraya Iron and Steel Plant (VISL) in Karnataka)

located principally in the eastern and central regions of India and situated close to domestic

sources of raw materials, including the Company's iron ore, limestone and dolomite mines.

History - The Precursor

SAIL traces its origin to the formative years of an emerging nation - India. After

independence the builders of modern India worked with a vision - to lay the infrastructure for

rapid industrialisaton of the country. The steel sector was to propel the economic growth.

Hindustan Steel Private Limited was set up on January 19, 1954.

Expanding Horizon (1959-1973)

Hindustan Steel (HSL) was initially designed to manage only one plant that was coming up at

Rourkela. For Bhilai and Durgapur Steel Plants, the preliminary work was done by the Iron

and Steel Ministry. From April 1957, the supervision and control of these two steel plants

were also transferred to Hindustan Steel. The registered office was originally in New Delhi. It

moved to Calcutta in July 1956, and ultimately to Ranchi in December 1959.

The 1 MT phases of Bhilai and Rourkela Steel Plants were completed by the end of

December 1961. The 1 MT phase of Durgapur Steel Plant was completed in January 1962

after commissioning of the Wheel and Axle plant. The crude steel production of HSL went up

from .158 MT (1959-60) to 1.6 MT. A new steel company, Bokaro Steel Limited, was

incorporated in January 1964 to construct and operate the steel plant at Bokaro. The second

phase of Bhilai Steel Plant was completed in September 1967 after commissioning of the

Wire Rod Mill. The last unit of the 1.8 MT phase of Rourkela - the Tandem Mill - was

commissioned in February 1968, and the 1.6 MT stage of Durgapur Steel Plant was

completed in August 1969 after commissioning of the Furnace in SMS. Thus, with the

completion of the 2.5 MT stage at Bhilai, 1.8 MT at Rourkela and 1.6 MT at Durgapur, the

total crude steel production capacity of HSL was raised to 3.7 MT in 1968-69 and

subsequently to 4MT in 1972-73.

Holding Company

The Ministry of Steel and Mines drafted a policy statement to evolve a new model for

managing industry. The policy statement was presented to the Parliament on December 2,

1972. On this basis, the concept of creating a holding company to manage inputs and outputs

under one umbrella was mooted. This led to the formation of Steel Authority of India Ltd.

The company, incorporated on January 24, 1973 with an authorized capital of Rs. 2000 crore,

was made responsible for managing five integrated steel plants at Bhilai, Bokaro, Durgapur,

Rourkela and Burnpur, the Alloy Steel Plant and the Salem Steel Plant. In 1978 SAIL was

restructured as an operating company.

Since its inception, SAIL has been instrumental in laying a sound infrastructure for the

industrial development of the country. Besides, it has immensely contributed to the

development of technical and managerial expertise. It has triggered the secondary and tertiary

waves of economic growth by continuously providing the inputs for the consuming industry.

Ownership and management

The Government of India owns about 75% of SAIL's equity and retains voting control of the

Company. However, SAIL, by virtue of its Maharatna status, enjoys significant operational

and financial autonomy.

Mr. P.K Singh is the current chairman of SAIL. Prior to this, hewas the Chief Executive

Officer (CEO) of Durgapur Steel Plant from 2012. Earlier in July 2015, he was given the

additional charge of CEO of IISCO Steel Plant, Burnpur (West Bengal). An alumnus of IIT-
Roorkee, he started his career in SAIL at its Bokaro Steel Plant in 1980. Singh also worked in

IISCO Steel Plant, Durgapur Steel Plant, Bokaro Steel Plant and Bhilai Steel Plant.

Operations

As of 31-Mar-2015, SAIL has 93,352 employees, as compared to 170,368 (as of 31-Mar-

2002). There has been a continuous reduction of headcount over the past few years due to

enhanced productivity and rationalised [Link] total requirement of its main raw

material, iron ore, is met through its captive mines. To meet its growing requirement,

capacities of existing iron ore mines are being expanded and new iron ore mines are being

developed. In addition, new iron ore deposits in the states of Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh,

Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha and Karnataka are being explored. Around 24% of its

coking coal requirements are met from domestic sources, the remaining through imports. For

improving coking coal security, the Company is also making efforts for development of new

coking coal blocks at Tasra and Sitanalla.

SAIL produced 13.9 million tonnes of crude steel by operating at 103% of its installed

capacity, which is an increase of 1% over the previous year. It also generated 710 MW of

electricity during FY2014-15.

Achievements – Awards and Accolades

SAIL has received many awards and accolades, since its inception, acknowledging its

tremendous performance under different categories. The following are the some of the major

awards:
 "Best of all" Rajiv Gandhi National Quality Award in 1993, 2006, and 2007 for their

Bhilai and Bokaro plants

 Quality Summit New York Gold Trophy 2007 (International Award for Excellence &

Business Prestige) and Award of Excellence Maintenance for Sumitomo Heavy

Industry & TSUBKIMOTO-KOGIO, Japan won by Alloy Steel Plant, Durgapur.

 SAIL was featured in the 2008 list of Forbes Global 2000 companies at position 647.

 Golden Peacock Award for Combating Climate Change – 2008 for BSP, Occupational

Health and Safety- 2008 for BSL

 National Safety Award to Bhilai Steel Plant announced by the Ministry of Labour &

Employment, Government of India – 2008

 Durgapur Steel Plant won the 2nd Prize in the Association of Business

Communicators of India Awards – 2008.

 Ispat Bhasha Bharati. the Rajbhasha Journal of SAIL has been awarded with the first

prize under the All India House Journal Award Scheme – 2008–09

 Salem Steel Plant received the prestigious Greentech Gold Award in Metal and

Mining Sector – 2008–09.

 Golden Peacock Award for Corporate Social Responsibility won by Bhilai Steel Plant

(BSP) for the third year in a row – 2009.

 Rourkela Steel Plant collectedthe prestigious Srishti Good Green Governance (G-

Cube) Award – 2009.

 Greentech HR Excellence Award secured by the Durgapur Steel Plant – 2009

 The steel township of Rourkela Steel Plant (RSP) has been ranked 14th in sanitation

and cleanliness by Union Urban Development Ministry – 2009–10

 Greentech Safety Gold Award was given to Bhilai Steel Plant – 2010
  The HR Excellence Award by the Greentech Foundation won by Bhilai Steel Plant –

2010

 SSP has won the prestigious Greentech Silver Award in Training Category of

Greentech HR Excellence Awards – 2010.

 Award for financial and operational strength by Indian Institute of Industrial

Engineering (IIIE)- 2009–10.

 Golden Peacock Environment Management Award – 2011.

 Randstad Award for HR Practices and Employer Branding under 'Manufacturing

Industries' category – 2011.

 Maiden Wockhardt Shining Star CSR Award in the Iron & Steel Sector category –

2011.

 Salem Steel Plant (SSP) has won the prestigious National Sustainability Award for the

6th time in succession and 13th time since inception of the award from Indian

Institute of Metals (IIM)- 2011.

Of the 33 Prime Minister's Shram Awards announced for 2010 by the Ministry of Labour,

Government of India,17 of which went to PSUs and SAIL employees won 11 awards among

them. Of the total number of 76 awardees for the year, 45 belong to SAIL – a remarkable

distinction for any organisation. Maharatna SAIL has received the prestigious Golden

Peacock Environment Management Award for the year 2011. The award, in recognition of

SAIL's initiatives and achievements in the field of environment management, was presented

by Union Minister for Home Affairs Shri P. Chidambaram on 24 June 2011.

74 of a total of 128 awardees who have won the prestigious Vishwakarma Rashtriya Puraskar

(VRP) are from SAIL. The 15 out of 28 awards won by SAIL went to our 74 employees for

the performance year 2008. Bhilai Steel Plant won 7 such awards involving 36 employees,

Bokaro Steel Plant won 6 awards involving 29 employees. Durgapur Steel Plant and Salem

Steel Plant both won 1 award each involving five and four employees respectively. SAIL

employees have won 4 out of 5 awards of Class A, which is the highest number of A Class

awards won by any PSU in India.

Future Plans

SAIL, is in the process of modernising and expanding its production units, raw material

resources and other facilities to maintain its dominant position in the Indian steel market. The

aim is to increase the production capacity from the base level production of 14.6 MT per

annum (2006–07) to 26.2 MT per annum of Hot Metal.

The following table shows the increased production of various items prior to and post

expansion.

On 25 May 2012, Steel Authority of India Limited entered into a Memorandum of

Understanding with the Government of West Bengal and Burn Standard Company Ltd. for

setting up of a Railway Wagon factory of approximately 210 crore (US$33 million). This

project will create an approximate 75,300 jobs.

The company also looking to establish one full capacity integrated plant in Andhra Pradesh or

Telangana and surveying the possibilities to set up the plant. The plant, which was proposed
to be the first steel plant of such scale in the state, was estimated to get an investment of Rs.

4,400 crore.

SAIL at Ranchi has four knowledge based units in Ranchi. A well-equipped Research and

Development Centre for Iron and Steel (RDCIS), which helps to produce quality steel and

develop new technologies for the steel industry through researches. Besides, SAIL has its

own in-house engineering consultancy, Centre for Engineering and Technology (CET),

Management Training Institute (MTI) and Sail Safety Organisation (SSO) at Ranchi.

3.2 R & D Centre for Iron and Steel (RDCIS)

RDCIS is a corporate R&D unit of Steel Authority of India Limited. It is India’s premier

research organization in the field of ferrous metallurgy. The main Centre located in Ranchi,

was established in 1972 and its modern laboratory Complex was inaugurated in 1986. RDCIS

undertakes research projects encompassing the entire spectrum of iron and steel starting from

raw materials to finished products. RDCIS is continuously engaged in improving the process

parameters, development of value added product, energyconservation, improvement in

product quality, up gradation of existing technologies and introduction of innovative

technologies in the plants and units of SAIL. RDCIS also offers technological services in the

form of know-how / transfer of technologies developed by it, consultancy services / contract

research, specialized testing services, & training. Technology Groups of RDCIS are divided

in different areas like Coal & Energy, Iron & Sinter, Steel, Rolling Technology, Product,

Refractory’s and Automation & Engineering. RDCIS has got its Plant Centre’s in all the five

integrated SAIL Plants and also at VISP, Bhadravati (Karnataka). RDCIS has also got its

liaison offices at Delhi and Kolkata.

The salient features of the Mission of RDCIS entail the following:

 Promote originality, foster creativity and expand knowledge base through the pursuit

of carefully selected R&D programmes

 Develop RDCIS’s human resources and facilities to achieve and sustain technological

excellence

 Complement SAIL plant’s efforts to continuously enhance Customer Satisfaction,

Quality, Productivity, Profitability and Marketability of their products.

Functions and Duties - Project Management

The technological services extended by RDCIS to SAIL plants and units are mainly in the

mode of R&D projects. The spectrum of R&D projects pursued by RDCIS, both at plants/

units as well as in-house, are categorized as follows: Plant Performance Improvement,

Product Development, Basic Research, Scientific Investigation & Development, Technical

Service. The projects so identified, have well defined objectives, approaches and activities to

accomplish the goal. Projects are identified after joint discussion between plant and RDCIS

personnel to provide solutions to identified problems. Work is carried out after project is

approved by the competent authority in the SAIL plant as well as RDCIS. Monitoring and

review of the projects is done at different levels and mid course corrections, if any, are also

suggested. At the end of the project, the outcome of thework is well documented after

concurrence from the customer who is also partner in the innovation. The implementation of

the innovations is also pursued.

Human Resource
RDCIS is a knowledge-based organization and therefore, human resource is its prime

resource. Development of adequate and appropriate human resource is a constant endeavor in

the organization. The selection of personnel aims at achieving a right mix in terms of

expertise, specialization and experience.

Laboratory Facilities

Since RDCIS provides solutions in all aspects of iron and steel technology, the Centre has

developed a full-fledged laboratory with state-of-art equipment starting from raw material

characterization to finished product evaluation. RDCIS is equipped with advanced diagnostic

equipment and pilot facilities to carry out the research activities. The Centre strives to

constantly modernize its facilities and infrastructure that will provide a cutting edge to its

research capabilities.

Technology Dissemination

RDCIS organizes Technology Awareness Programmes to enhance the knowledge base of

SAIL engineers and technologists, especially those working on the shop floor, by sharing

technological experience to enhance, analyze and solve technological problems. These

programmes cover a wide range of topics dealing with different technology areas in the steel

plants.

Product Development

One of the prime focus area at RDCIS involves development of new products with

exceptional quality attributes. These products are developed through Lab. Scale studies &

Simulation work followed by plant scale trials at various units of SAIL using existing
facilities. Subsequently those products are promoted and commercialized through product

application and marketing efforts. The thrust on product development enables the Company

to achieve greater market penetration and share.

Technology Marketing

RDCIS offers technological services to various organizations in the form of Know-how

transfer of technologies developed by RDCIS, consultancy services / contract research

specialized testing services and training. This helps to establish credibility of the Centre as a

knowledge centre besides generating revenue through external earnings.

Intellectual Capital

In the current competitive market scenario, it has become important to protect the innovations

resulting from R&D pursuits. This is being accomplished at RDCIS by filing patents and

copyrights under Patent Act and Copyrights Act respectively. Enlargement of intellectual

capital base is constantly encouraged in the Centre.

Corporate Social Responsibility

SAIL has been a pioneer in the area of Corporate Social Responsibility ( CSR ) substantially

contributing towards betterment of society around the periphery of steel plants / units. The

credo of SAIL specially highlights the commitment towards society at large. A lot work has

been done by RDCIS unit of SAIL at Ranchi to improve the quality of life in and around

RDCIS. RDCIS, considers it important to extend help to economically backward

group/physically handicapped and mentally retarded persons and has taken various measures

in the field of environment conservation, health and Medicare, education women and youth
empowerment, providing potable drinking water, installation of solar light systems in

peripheral areas, organizing and providing training to youth entrepreneurs, students, etc.

Various developmental programmes have been undertaken by RDCIS in and around Ranchi

in close co-ordination with the State Government, District Administration as well as the local

administration, social organizations and people’s representative.

Various activities have been undertaken by RDCIS as a part of CSR programme in the

following areas:

 Medical and health care

 Drinking water facilities

 Educational facilities

 Women and Youth empowerment (income generating scheme)

 Other developmental work

The Research & Development Centre for Iron & Steel (RDCIS) at Ranchi is the corporate

R&D unit of SAIL. Set up in 1972, the Centre has ISO: 9001 certifications to its credit. It is a

major and biggest unit amongst others in Ranchi. It undertakes R&D projects in diverse

realms of Iron & Steel Technology under the categories of Plant Performance Improvement

(PPI), Product Development (PD), Scientific Investigation and Development (SID), Basic

Research (BR) and Technical Services (TS).

RDCIS has around 236 dedicated and competent scientists and engineers and its laboratory is

equipped with around 300 sophisticated diagnostic research equipment and 5 pilot plant

facilities.
RDCIS provides customers with prompt, innovative and cost-effective R&D solutions;

develop and commercialize improved processes and products; continually enhance the

capability of its human resources to emerge as a centre of excellence. The major efforts are

directed towards cost reduction, quality improvement and value-addition to products of SAIL

plants and providing application engineering support to SAIL’s products at customers’ end.

RDCIS, along with steel plants, takes initiatives to develop special steel products utilizing the

modernized production facilities at steel plants.

RDCIS also offers technological services to various organizations in the form of Know-how

transfer of technologies developed by RDCIS; Consultancy services; specialized testing

services; Contract research; Technology Awareness Programmes.

Considering the importance of R & D unit of SAIL, and presently working in same

organization, the proposed project proposal i.e., KM issues in R & D organization, which is

found to be most appropriate and relevance to the present competitive environment, the

whole study / research under the proposed project has been initiated and shall be carried out

at R & D unit of SAIL in Ranchi.

Some of the important technological services undertaken recently are:

 Consultancy for setting up a R&D Centre for Mobarekeh Steel Co., Iran.

 Consultancy for preparation of Anhydrous Mass at EISCO, Egypt Clay Mill for BF

 Development of slab gap detection sensor for identification of slabs in steel plant

applications, DIT, New Delhi

 Development of on line surface inspection system for hot rolled flat products, DIT,

New Delhi
 A Study to ascertain extent of replication of energy efficient technologies in steel re-

rolling mills in India forPMC, UNDP/GEF Project (Steel) with Ministry of Steel,

Govt. of India.

 Data gathering and analysis of Echo-tech options in steel re-rolling sector in India for

PMC, UNDP/GEF Project (Steel) with Ministry of Steel, Govt. of India.

 Residual stress measurement/ Fatigue load test of rails forRDSO, Lucknow/ Southern

Railway, Chennai

 Joint development and commercialisation of rolling oils for rolling mills of steel

plants forIOC-R&D, Faridabad, HPCL, Mumbai & Balmer Lawrie, Kolkata.

 Testing and Evaluation of rolling and rust preventive oils forvarious oil

manufacturers.

 Development of Corrosion resistant Roof bolting system for underground mines

forCoal India Ltd., Kolkata ( S& T fund - Ministry of Coal )

 Development of PLC based integrated control & monitoring system for conveyors

and other equipment of underground mines for Coal India Ltd (CIL– R&D)

 Application of high strength roof bolting in underground mines CMPDIL (Coal –

S&T)

 Up–gradation of reheating furnaces for improving efficiency & reduction of GHG

emissions from re–rolling mills for PCRA, New Delhi.

 Consultancy assignment for retrofitting technologies for improving energy-

efficiency& reducing GHG emissions of existing reheating furnaces in small &

medium sector re-rolling mills, PCRA, New Delhi

 Design, development of energy efficient tunnel kiln for white ware industry for

PCRA, New Delhi

 Replication of retro–fitting technologies for improving energy–efficiency and

reducing GHG emission of existing re-heating furnaces in small & medium sector

re–rolling mills for PCRA, New Delhi.

 Various tests / material characterisation using Gleeble 3500C System for BHEL-

WRI, Tiruchirappalli;Tata Steel, Jamshedpur; IGCAR, Kalpakkam; DRDL,

Hyderabad;VSSC, Thiruvananthapuram;NFC, Hydrabad;LPSC, Trivendrum; IIT

Bombay,Powai;IIT, Khargpur,etc.

 Consultancy services for Intellectual Property Rights Management at RINL,

Visakhapatnam

 Effect of Chemical composition on properties and galvanisability of structural steel

for TLT segment for Power Grid Corpn. of India Ltd,Gurgaon

 Thermography survey ofKalyani Steel, Pune;BPSCL,Bokaro;

BESCL,Bhilai;NSPCL,Rourkela

 Consultancy services for Feasibility study on setting up of heat treatment facilities

for critical mechanical components, Khopoli

 Development of semi processed un–coated electrical steels for Uttam Galva Steel,

Khopoli

 Various tests/studies using Hot Dip Process Simulation (HDPS) unit for product

development of Tata Steel Ltd., Jamshedpur.

 Transfer of know-how for design configuration of modified tundish impact pads

toIFGL, Kolkata;Refcom, Purulia; Refracast, Raipur, Orient Refractory Ltd.,New

Delhi.

 Beneficiation of iron ore fines forFerro Green Limited,Bangalore;KMMI, Bellary;

VSL Co. Bellary.

  Residual Life Assessment (RLA) through Accelerated Creep Rupture Test (ACRT)

for boiler plates/tubes for NTPC–Alstom, New Delhi.

 Consultancy services for Improvement in sinter plant performance for Ispat

Industries Ltd. Dolvi

 Characterisation of patented steel wire/rods forUsha Martin Ltd.,Tatisilwai.

 Metallurgical investigations of samples of various Customers.

3.3 Activities of R&D organisation of SAIL

RDCIS of SAIL are involved in various activities as given below:

a). Identification of new concepts / Ideas generation through laboratory research, b).

Feasibility studies, c). Selection of appropriate concept / Idea, d). Product development, e).

Acquisition of relevant knowledge and technology, f). Designing new systems and

equipment, g. Prototype Development, h). Concept demonstration to user, i). Service

approved for Development j). Finalization of technical specification document, k).

Technology demonstration to the customer, l). Modifications for production improvement,

m. Final Product development, n). Technology Marketing / Commercialization, o). Delivery

and after commissioningservices p). Training to user, q). Customer feedback and product

improvement r). Generation of new knowledge / technologies s). Development of new

materials, processes and services, t) Generation of intellectual properties rights to the

organisation, u) Generation of revenues through royalties, v) Conducting seminars,

conferences, workshops etc., for sharing of knowledges.

 Chapter –4
Impact of Knowledge
Management on
Organisational performance
– An Analysis
4.1 Measurement of R&D performance

The investment made in KM systems is generally of two types i.e. human resource and

information technology infrastructure. Since, knowledge management system includes

organization wide policy, strategy, responsibilities, plans, actions and inspections etc., to

generate new knowledge and effectively use existing resources to meet organizational

objectives and enhance customer satisfaction. Therefore, measurement of effectiveness of

knowledge management system is very complex task.

Performance measurement of RDCIS is an essential prerequisite for communication with

external parties especially when the organization needs to seek finance for their research

projects from SAIL HO, banks or other industries. Therefore, benefits of R&D must be

interpreted into understandable common terms and communicated in a comprehensible way.

In contrary with other organizations, R&D organizations have broad range of results for

different stakeholders. The outputs and results of the R&D activities are input for further

processes in the value chain with the aim of commercializing the knowledge. In the end, the

R&D results of organizations are translated into new products, increasing, in turn, the

revenue and profits of the organization and amortizing the R&D investments. For RDCIS of

SAIL, initially the number of research papers published by researchers in a year and number

of patents registered or number of new products successfully developed are adapted as

indicators.

Knowledge as a key driver of Competitive Advantage?

This central theme was explored with participants, who were asked if they believed that

successful management of their organisational knowledge contributed to overall

organisational effectiveness and was a key source of competitive advantage, and it was

broadly accepted that structured and systematic knowledge management is tightly linked with

gaining and sustaining competitive advantage.

4.2 Impact of KM in R&D Organisation of SAIL

Executives from all relevant technical departments of RDCIS of SAIL at Ranchi were asked

to respond to the structured questionnaire provided to them to identify existence of awareness

about knowledge management and its potential benefits. In the questionnaire, the following

under four broad categories based questions whose response was obtained according to five-

point Likert scale with 1 being the lowest and 5 being the highest level of existence of the

said practice or awareness level:

A) Information Technology Centered KM

 Believes in IT
 Uses IT
 Internet
 Groupware
 Instant Messages

B) Capture based KM

 Emphasize codification
 Emphasize capture
 Store customer complaints
  Believes K can be retained
 Storage of K on intranet

C) Learning based KM

 Emphasizes learning
 Solutions adopted
 Ideas move from individual to organization
 Policies for knowledge exchange
 Recommendations adopted
 Employee input to critical decisions
 Employees knowledgeable
 Employees share ideas and experience
 Acquire knowledge in interactions
 Shaping of technology and standards

D) Organizational performance

 Adapt to unanticipated changes

 Employees satisfied
 Commercializes innovations
 Employees motivated to perform
 Potential to succeed in changes
 Identify new opportunities
 Meet customers' future needs
 Capabilities for future performance
 Capable and driven leadership
 Loyal customers
The structured questions were developed to assess the direct or indirect existence of present

situation of practices related to knowledge management.

4.3 Statistical Analysis of data

The response received to above questions was statistically analyzed to get holistic picture.

The mean and standard deviation of response received against each question is given in

respective tables. The impact of knowledge management on organizational performance was

given below Tables:

Table 4.3.1 Mean and Standard Deviation of IT Centered KM

Std.
ITCenteredKM N Mean
Deviation

Believes IT 100 4.09 0.751

Uses IT 100 3.90 0.823
Internet 100 3.10 1.331
Groupware 100 3.60 1.039
Instant Messaging 100 3.55 1.129
Overall 3.65 0.709

From the table 4.3.1, it is inferred that most of respondents felt that the items ‘believes IT’

(M= 4.09, SD=0.751) and ‘uses IT’ (M=3.90, SD=0.823) were most crucial factors in IT

centered KM.

Table4.3.2 Mean and Standard Deviation of Capture based KM

 Std.
Capture based KM N Mean Deviation
Emphasize codification 100 3.60 0.895
Emphasize capture 100 3.56 0.895
Store customer complaints 100 4.02 0.805
Believes K can be retained 100 3.81 0.912
Storage of K on intranet 100 4.03 0.847
Overall 3.80 0.613

It can be seen from table 4.3.2, that most of respondents felt that the items ‘Customer

complaints’ (M= 4.02, SD=0.805) and ‘storage of K on intranet’ (M=4.03, SD=0.847) were

most crucial factors in capture based KM.

Table4.3.3 Meanand Standard Deviation of Learning based KM

Std. Deviation
Learning based KM N Mean

Emphasizes learning 100 3.77 0.802

Solutions adopted 100 3.59 0.932

Ideas move from individual to organization 100 3.50 0.996

Policies for knowledge exchange 100 3.53 0.950

Recommendations adopted 100 3.68 0.905

Employee input to critical decisions 100 3.49 0.917

Employees knowledgeable 100 3.92 0.842

Employees share ideas and experience 100 3.56 1.017

Acquire knowledge in interactions 100 3.48 0.980

Shaping of technology and standards 100 3.71 0.969

Over all 3.62 0.631

The table 4.3.3 brings to view that most of respondents felt that the items ‘Knowledgeable

employees’ (M= 3.92, SD=0.842) and ‘Emphasizes learning’ (Mean=3.77&SD=0.802) were

found to be crucial factors in Learning based KM.

Table4.3.4 Mean and Standard Deviation of Organizational performance

Std.
Organizational performance N Mean
Deviation
Adapt to unanticipated changes 100 3.48 1.031

Employees satisfied 100 3.58 0.944

Commercializes innovations 100 3.54 1.003

Employees motivated to perform 100 3.63 0.917

Potential to succeed in changes 100 3.93 0.867

Identify new opportunities 100 3.88 0.840

Meet customers 'future needs 100 4.13 0.790

Capabilities for future performance 100 4.14 0.769

Capable and driven leadership 100 3.88 0.869

Loyal customers 100 3.98 0.772

Overall 3.82 0.614

From the above table 4.3.4, it can be interpreted that most of respondents felt that the items

‘Capabilities for future performance’ (M= 4.14, SD=0.769) and ‘Meet customer’s future

needs’ (M=4.13, SD=0.790) were most crucial factors in Organizational Performance.

4.4 Relationship between KM Strategies and Organizational

Performance

To find the extent to which knowledge management strategies influence organizational

performance, this study has employed bivariate correlations. The table 4.4.1 exhibits that

relationship between IT centered KM and Organizational performance(r=0.457), Capture

based KM and Organizational performance (r=0.456) are moderate and statistically

significant at 0.01 level, and Learning based KM and organizational performance are

positively significant (r=0.736). Thus, learning based KM is highly correlated to

organizational performance.

Table4.4.1 Results of Correlation Analysis

Dependent Sig.
Independent variables R value Results
variable (1-tailed)
IT centered KM 0.457** 0.000 Significant
Organizational
Captured based KM 0.456** 0.000 Significant
performance
Learning based KM 0.736** 0.000 Significant

**Correlation is significant at 0.01levels(1-tailed)

The study also indicates that R&D organisation of SAIL has sufficient awareness about

knowledge management and its benefits. Higher and middle management’s commitment for

knowledge sharing is up to the mark. The IT, intranet and joint meetings are in practice,

which establishes the required baseline for knowledge management initiative. R&D of SAIL

is still continuing of utilizing the number of published research papers, number of filed

patents, number of new products developed, certified annual benefits by the internal
customers etc., over the period of a year as major indicators to measure its R&D performance

of the personnel.
 Chapter –5
Conclusions &
Suggestions
5.1 Summary of the present study

Knowledge management is a useful tool in the efficient utilization of resources. It enhances

customer satisfaction, stimulates elements of R&D process and has potential to improve the

organization’s return on investment. Knowledge management helps R&D organizations in

managing the key asset i.e. knowledge which serves the purpose of stock for future projects

as well.

The research provides comprehensive methodology for success of knowledge management

concept in R&D organizations and identifies problems followed by proposing solutions

accordingly. To meet the ultimate objective i.e. provision of quick and affordable solutions,

the knowledge management must be implemented in R&D organizations. The guidelines

suggested in this study will certainly help decision makers in launching knowledge

management initiative in R&D organizations thus further leading to enhanced performance

and adding benefits to national economy.

Knowledge management, if implemented in the organization in real spirit, provides

identification and sharing of available information technology tools, equipment, expertise of

researchers and provides a platform conducive for knowledge sharing culture resulting in

improved performance of the company, SAIL.

5.2 Major findings of the present study

IT can provide performance benefits only if it is supported by organizational processes. KM

is yet another IT solution for an IT-centered KM strategy. Therefore, the organisations that
follow such a strategy, implement IT systems as KM and make one or more organizational

members responsible for KM. These actions, however, do not provide any performance

benefit for firms because IT-centered strategy merely focuses on making the infrastructure

available and does not develop systems and processes to use the knowledge. The bivariate

correlation showed that IT centered was weakly correlated to organizational performance

and similar to the view. The finding is consistent with the study of Davenport (1997) and

McDermott (1999).

A firm that exploits its knowledge gains performance advantage. Although exploiting

current knowledge is important for an organization's success and prosperity, exploitation

alone will not provide a firm with long-term success because when knowledge is readily

available, it cripples development of knowledge assets by hindering experimentation and

exploration. The bivariate correlation showed the capture based KM also is weakly

correlated to organizational performance. The finding is confirmed with the findings of

March (1991) and Schulz (2001).

The capacity created by learning-based KM strategy was play a vital role in yielding

performance. Further, the learning processes that help in knowledge creation also aid in

leveraging the knowledge, which is more important for firm performance than the

knowledge itself. The bivariate correlation showed that learning based KM is highly

significant and similar to the view. The finding is consistent with the study of Alavi &

Leidner (2001) and Pisano, Bohmer & Edmondson (2001).

  Although the correlation coefficient between IT centered KM andOrganizational

performance is positively significant, IT centered KM isweakly correlated to

organizational performance.

 Although there is significant association between capture based KM

andorganizational performance, Capture based KM is also weaklycorrelated to

organizational performance.

 Learning based KM is highly correlated to organizational performance.

 IT process for KM does not positively influence organizationalperformance, even

though the correlation coefficient between IT processfor KM and organizational

performance is significant.

 IT support for KM does not positively influence organizationalperformance though

the correlation between IT process andorganizational performance is significant.

5.3 Conclusions

The objective of the study is to examine the impact of KM strategies on organizational

performance from comprehensive cross-sectional survey. The results provide a clear and up

to date picture of knowledge management strategies adopted by the SAIL and its influence on

organizational performance. The relationship between knowledge management strategies and

organizational performance and moderating effect of each strategy on organizational

performance are discussed.

To identify whether there is a relationship between three types of Knowledge management

strategies and organizational performance or not, the study employed correlation analysis.

The result of the analysis is that the relationship between IT centered KM and organizational
performance, capture based KM and organizational performance were moderate and found to

be significant and learning based KM was highly correlated towards organizational

performance and found to be and significant.

To understand the extent of variation shown by knowledge management strategies on

organizational performance, the study employed multiple regression analysis. From the

results, it is understood that independent variables namely IT process for KM, IT support for

KM and capture based KM were found to be insignificant and an independent variable

namely learning based KM is significant. On other hand, moderate variables namely IT

process for KM and capture based KM were found to be insignificant and only one moderate

variable namely IT support were found to be significant. Also, the variables together

observed considerable variation on dependent variable ‘organizational performance’.

5.4 Expected Contribution

Knowledge management is becoming an important area for researchers for its diverse and

expanding nature. Further research can be done on the efficiency of information systems in

providing accurate information, can be observed with respect to multiple organizations. More

research can be done on the issue of organization structure influence on the knowledge

management in knowledge and labour intensive industries. Further research on knowledge

management can be carried out based on the outcome of this study due to continuously

changing technology and economic environment.

5.5 Limitations
Due to unavailability of sufficient number of case studies and data i.e. R&D of SAIL

employing knowledge management over the period of time, the hypothesis for optimization

of R&D performance using knowledge management cannot be carried out in true sense. The

unavailability of data regarding R&D performance and extent of utilization of knowledge

management practices has also prevented the development of any mathematical model which

may have been employed for examination and forecasting the improvement.

The other major constraints faced during the study are:

 Difficulties in Data collections from R& D organisations

 Geographical limitations of sample and its sizes

 Understanding of KM in proper perspective

 Un-availability of practical and comprehensive models

5.6 DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH:

No research is complete. Meaningful research should always suggest certain areas for further

research and investigation for improvement. This project work is a unique attempt to find

impact of KM initiatives on Intellectual Capital of R&D organization of SAIL.

Knowledge management has lot of social impacts as well; it turns the thinking of people and

develops culture of mutual respect thus uplifting the ethics at work places as well. Therefore,

it is envisaged that a standard of knowledge management System may be developed similar

like ISO 9001 in the case of Quality Management for subsequent adaptation by the

organizations and assessment for compliance with developed system. The effectiveness of the

KM intervention can be determined and linked with R&D performance by monitoring the
indicators over the time. Following are certain areas which would require further research on

the subject:

 R&D organization of other steel industries and other industries may be studied further

for similarity and distinctiveness

 Integration of KM with other new managerial initiatives

 Application of IT in KM

 Application of developed KM models in typical R & D organization involving

delicate managerial works.

Bibliography
Bibliography
 Alavi M, Leidner DE. 1999. Knowledge management systems: Issues, challenges and

beliefs. Communications of the AIS 1(7):1-37

 Alavi, M., and D. Leidner. 2001. “Knowledge Management and Knowledge

Management. Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues.’’ MIS Quarterly

25(1): 107-36.

 Albert, S, & Bradley, K (1999), Managing knowledge: Experts, agencies, and

organizations. Cambridge, UK: New York: Cambridge University Press.

 Allee, V.(1997) “12 Principles Of Knowledge Management” . Training and

Development 51(1): 71-74

 Altshuler, Alan A., and Marc [Link]. 1997. “Innovation in public Management:

Notes from the state House and City Hall.” In Innovation in the Public Sector, ed. Alan

A. Altshuler and Robert D. Behn, 68-80. Washington, Dc: Brookings Institution.

 Amrit Tiwara.2002. The Knowledge Management Toolkit: Orchestrating IT, Strategy,

and Knowledge Platforms (2/e).New Delh, India: Dorling Kindersley Publishing Inc

and Pearson Education.

 Anderson JC, Gerbing DW. 1982. Some Methods for Re specifying Measurement

Models to obtain Uni dimensional Construct Measurement, journal of marketing

research 19(4): 453-460.

 Bahra, Nickolas. 2001. Competitive Knowledge Management. Houndmils, UK:

Palgrave.

 Barzelay, Michael. 2001. The New Public Management. Berkeley: University of

California Press.
 Baliga BR, Moyer RC, Rao RS. 1996. CEO duality and firm performance: What's the

fuss? Strategic Management Journal 17(1): 41- 53.

 Bamett WP, Hansen MT. 1996. The Red Queen in organizational evolution. Strategic

Management Journal 17(Summer Special Issue): 139-157.

 Barnes, Stuart .2002. Knowledge Management Systems – Theory and Practice.

London: Thomson Learning

 Barney JB. 1997. Gaining and sustaining competitive advantage. MA: Addison-Wesley

 Chadha, Gaurav, and S.M. Nafay Kumail .2002. E-Learning: An expression of the

Knowledge Economy. New Delhi: Tata Mc GrawHill.

 Chien Chun Lun, Grace 2006. Integrating Knowledge Management into Market

Orientation: Impact on Hotel Performance. Ph.D. Thesis – hotel and tourism

management. Hong Kong Polytechnic University.

 Chin W.W. (1995), Partial Least Squares is to LISREL as Principal Component

Analysis is to common factor analysis, technology studies 2(2): 315-319

 Chin W.W. (1998), “The Partial Least Squares approach for Structural Equation

Modeling”. In George A. Marcoulides(Ed.)Modern Methods for Business Research,

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

 Danneels E. 2002. The dynamics of product innovation and firm competences.

Strategic Management Journal 23(12): 1095-1121.

 Daryl Morey, Maybury, Mark; Thuraisingham.2002. Knowledge Management - Classic

and contemporary works. New York: Oxford University Press.

 Darr ED, Argote L, Epple D. 1995. The acquisition, transfer, and depreciation of

knowledge in service organizations: Productivity in franchises. Management Science

41(11): 1750-1762.
 Darroch J, McNaughton R. 2003. Beyond market orientation: Knowledge management

and the innovativeness of New Zealand firms. European Journal of Marketing 37(3/4):

572-593.

 Davenport T. 1997. Ten principles of knowledge management and four case studies.

Knowledge and process management 4(3): 187-208.

 Davenport TH, Long DWD, Beers MC. 1998. Successful knowledge management

projects. Sloan Management Review 39(2): 43-57.

 Eisenhardt KM, Martin JA. 2000. Dynamic Capabilities: What are they? Strategic

Management Journal 21(10/11): 1105-1121.

 Elias M. Awad, Hassan M. Ghaziri 2004. Knowledge Management. New Delhi, India:

Dorling Kindersley Publishing Inc and Pearson Education.

 Evans, C. 2003. Managing for Knowledge: HR’s Strategic Role. Boston: Butterworth-

Heinemann.

 Fahey, L., Prusak,L.(1988), “ The Eleven Deadliest Sins Of Knowledge Management”,

California Management Review,40(3): 231-246.

 Faget, Nancy. 2004. “KM Learning Objectives.” KM. gov (January 14), Available

http//:[Link]/Quickplace/km/pageLibrary/85256C79002EE7 [Link]. Accessed May

23, 2005

 Gardner, Christopher. 2000. The Valuation of Information Technology. New York:

John Wiley and sons.

 Geoff Walsham.2001. Knowledge Management: The Benefits and Limitations of

Computer Systems. European Management Journal 19(6): 599–608.

 Goh, [Link] a learning organization: The strategic building blocks. Advanced

Management Journal,63(2);15-18
 Hansen. M.T, Nohria N, Tierney T. 1999. What‘s your strategy for managing

knowledge?. Harvard Business Review 77(2): 106-116.

 Hassounah, Jamil. 2001. “Developing a Learning Organization in the Public Sector.”

Quality Progress 34(1): 106-109.

 Hedlund G. 1994. A Model of Knowledge Management and the N-Form Corporation.

Strategic Management Journal 15(S2): 73-90.

 Hinkin R. 1995. A review of scale development practices in the study of organizations.

Journal of Management 21(5):967-988.

 Lane PJ, Salk JE, Lyles MA. 2001. Absorptive capacity, learning, and\ performance in

international joint ventures. Strategic Management Journal 22(12): 1139-1161.

 Levin DZ, Cross R, Abrams LC. 2002. Why Should I Trust You? Predictors of

Interpersonal Trust in a Knowledge Transfer Context, Academy of Management

meetings: Denver.

 Malhotra Y. “Is knowledge the ultimate competitive advantage? Business Management

Asia, September 2003, Q3/4, pp. 66-69. 216.

 Martie M. Squier, Retha Snyman.2004. Knowledge management in three financial

organizations: a case study. Aslib Proceedings 56(4): 234– 242.

 Nikos Karacapilidis, Emmanuel Adamides, Christina Evangelou.2003. Leveraging

Organizational Knowledge to formulate Manufacturing Strategy. Proceedings of the

11th European conference on Information systems (ECIS’03), Naples, Italy. 16-21

 Nonaka I, Takeuchi H. 1995. The knowledge-creating company; How Japanese

companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford University Press: New York.

 Nunnally JC. 1978. Psychometric Theory. McGraw-Hill: New York.

 Podsakoff PM, Organ DW. 1986. Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and

prospects. Journal of Management 12(4): 531- 544.

 Polanyi, M. (1958), Personal Knowledge, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL

 Polanyi, Michael. 1958. Personal Knowledge. Chicago : university of Chicago press.

 Polanyi M. 1966. The tacit dimension. Doubleday: New York

 Smith, P.A.C. and Tosey, P. “Assessing the Learning Organization: Part1-Exploring

Practical Assessment Approaches”, the Learning Organization, 6(2):70-75

 Smith C, Comer D. 1994. Self-organization in small groups: A study of group

effectiveness in non-equilibrium conditions. Human Relations 47(5): 553-582.

 Soliman, F. and Spooner, K.2000. Strategies for implementing knowledge

management; Role of human resource management. Journal of Knowledge,

Management 4(4):337-345.

 Uma Sekaran 2007 Research Methods for Business- A Skill Building Approach, 4th

Edition, Wiley India [Link].

 Uzzi B, Lancaster R. 2003. Relational embeddedness and learning: The case of bank

loan managers and their clients. Management Science 49(4): 383-399.

 Vermeulen F, Barkema H. 2001. Learning through acquisitions. Academy of

Management, Journal 44(3): 457-476.

Questionnaire
 APPENDIX – I
Research Questionnaire
Topic :
Dear Respondent,
A research study on “Knowledge Management to Enhance Intellectual Capital of a R&D

Organisation - Steel Authority of India Limited, Ranchi” has been undertaken for MBA

programme of Indira Gandhi National Open University. I solicit your valuable response and suggestion

on this questionnaire for the study. I shall be extremely grateful for giving your valuable time for

filling up the questionnaire. Your response will be used for academic / research purpose only.

Please (√) tick mark to provide the Basic Information here.

Part I: - Demographic Profile

Age 20 - 30 31 - 40 41 – 50 >50
(in years)

Gender Male Female

Educational Diploma UG PG Others

Qualification
--------

Experience < 10 11 - 20 21 - 30 > 30

(In years)

Designation E1 – E3 E4 – E5 E6 – E7 E8 – E9
(Grade)

Department HRM, Systems Engineering R&D Materials

Management

Monthly income 20000 - 50000 50001 - 80000 80001 - 100000 > 1,00,000
(In IR)
Note: Kindly tick the appropriate box
Part II: - Demographic Profile

Please encircle appropriate number that corresponds to the extent to which you agree or
disagree with each other of the following statement.

1 – Strongly Disagree (SD) 2 – Disagree (D)

3 – Neutral (N) 4 – Agree (A)
5 – Strongly Agree (SA)

I T CENTERED KM

[Link]. IT Centered KM SD D N A SA

1 My organisation believes that 1 2 3 4 5

implementing IT based KM tools is
important for managing knowledge

2 My organisation uses technology as 1 2 3 4 5

primary means for managing
knowledge

3 Knowledge management systems and 1 2 3 4 5

processes in my organisation include
internet facilities to all executives
which is useful.

4 Knowledge management systems and 1 2 3 4 5

processes in my organisation include
groupware, i.e., computer applications
to help people collaborate online.

5 Knowledge management systems and 1 2 3 4 5

processes in my organisation include
instant messaging to exchange short
messages in real time.
 CAPTURED BASED KM

[Link]. Captured based KM SD D N A SA

1 My organisation emphasizes codifying 1 2 3 4 5

employees’ knowledge in documents.

2 My organisation emphasizes codifying 1 2 3 4 5

employees’ knowledge in computers.

3 My organisation stores customer 1 2 3 4 5

complaints and feedback for future
use.

4 My organisation believes that KM 1 2 3 4 5

helps to retain knowledge in the
company especially when critical
employees leave.

5 Knowledge management systems and 1 2 3 4 5

processes in my organisation include
using an internet to store information
needed by employees.
 LEARNING BASED KM

[Link]. Learning based KM SD D N A SA

1 My organisation emphasizes learning 1 2 3 4 5

as a means to manage knowledge

2 Good solutions developed by one 1 2 3 4 5

group / unit in my organisation are
easily adopted by other groups / units

3 Relevant information / ideas easily 1 2 3 4 5

move from individual to organisation

4 Policies and procedures are in place to 1 2 3 4 5

facilitate knowledge exchange between
individuals to organisation.

5 Recommendations made by groups 1 2 3 4 5

based on prior experience are often
adopted by my organisation

6 Employees in my organisation have

input into the critical decisions made
by management

7 Employees in my organisation are

current and knowledgeable about their
work

8 Employees freely share their ideas and

experiences with others in my
organisation

9 Employees in my organisation acquire

new knowledge through interactions
with other organisational members

10 My organisation regularly updates

latest technology and standards
 ORGANISATIONAL PERFORMANCE

[Link]. Organisational Performance SD D N A SA

1 My organisation has the ability to adapt 1 2 3 4 5

quickly to unanticipated changes
2 Employees in my organisation are 1 2 3 4 5
satisfied with organizational
performance.
3 My organisation is capable of rapidly 1 2 3 4 5
commercializing new innovations
4 Employees in my organisation are 1 2 3 4 5
motivated to strive for better
performance.
5 My organisation has the potential to be 1 2 3 4 5
successful in the face of technological
and environmental changes.
6 My organisation has the ability to 1 2 3 4 5
continuously identify new business
oppurtunities.
7 My organisation can meet customers 1 2 3 4 5
future needs.
8 My organisation has the capabilities to 1 2 3 4 5
ensure its future performance.
9 My organisation’s leadership is capable 1 2 3 4 5
and driven.
10 My organisation’s customers are loyal. 1 2 3 4 5

If you have any suggestion, to improve the KM initiatives and its performance for
organization, which can improve the intellectual capital of RDCIS, SAIL. (Please give your
suggestion in the box given below.)

…………….……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…..
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……...

Thank you for your kind cooperation.

(S Thirumalai Selvam)
RDCIS , SAIL
Ranchi – 834 002