Serban & Luan, (2002) present a careful overview of KM in the context of Institutional Research (IR). IR and strategic planning have multiple functions in colleges and universities. Joe Saupe (1990), perhaps, provides us with one of the best descriptions of the nature of institutional research, of its role in institutional governance and of the contributions it can make to the function of postsecondary institutions. J. Fredericks Volkwein (1999) provides us with a comprehensive volume about institutional research. Andrea M. Serban (2002) contributed to our understanding of IR by providing us with a look at the contemporary IR person in the knowledge management context. These foun- dations of IR literature reveal that, theoretically, IR should use and integrate knowledge management principles in order to provide key decision-making support. Moreover, in order for the IR person to be successful, this person must
successfully navigate institutional database systems while providing analytical products to decision-makers.
According to J. Fredericks Volkwein (1999), the IR profession is described as having four faces, wholly based on the people served and the culture of the organization where IR is being executed. The four faces he described center around the notion that IR serves as information authority, spin doctor, policy analyst, and scholar and researcher. Andrea M. Serban (2002) adds a fifth face of IR: knowledge management. She contends that “in a knowledge manage- ment environment, these four facets continue to exist; however, they converge into a broader, more integrated dimension—the fifth face of institutional research—IR as knowledge manager” (Serban, 2002, p. 105) (see Table 1).
This fifth face of IR requires different training than that referred to by Saupe and Volkwein. In fact, knowledge management requires people with interpersonal Table 1. Purposes and roles of institutional research
Purposes and Audiences Formative and
Internal (for Improvement)
Summative and External (for Accountability) Organizational
Role and Culture Administrative and Institutional
To describe the institution IR as information authority
To present the best case IR as spin doctor
Academic and Professional
To analyze alternatives IR as policy analyst
To supply impartial evidence of effectiveness
IR as scholar & researcher Knowledge
Management
To gather and transform data into information and knowledge; to collaborate in the creation and maintenance of an institutional official repository of data, information, and knowledge (i.e., portals); to facilitate the process of knowledge creation, capturing, and sharing.
IR as knowledge manager
Adapted from Serban (2002, p. 106) and Volkwein (1999, p. 17)
skills that can negotiate an organization’s culture and still have strong skills in business processes and technology.
IR in a KM framework has its benefits and challenges, and, therefore, it is best to understand them. According to Serban (2002), “there are clear advantages of implementing knowledge management frameworks and processes” (p. 108), which are summarized in Table 2.
The benefits to KM clearly outweigh the challenges associated with employing such principles. For example, if an organization has a need to somehow leverage its endowed knowledge base in order to be competitive in the marketplace, this can be accomplished by providing its users access to institutional information so that knowledge creation can occur, thereby, adding to the effectiveness and efficiencies in decision-making. However, when information asymmetry exists, the rewards to this KM benefit fail to materialize.
The main challenge arises when the organizational culture is not responsive to sharing information and to knowledge creation. Arguably, organizational culture can be an impediment instead of an enabler and can lead to a lack of clear institutional sense of purpose and direction. Culture as an impediment can be symptomatic of a much greater problem such as leadership void in IR, the Table 2. Benefits and challenges of KM
Benefits Challenges
Access to and sharing of
knowledge Strategy—developing a clear sense of direction Customer responsiveness Tacit knowledge and
organizational cultures
Better understanding of the
organization and its customers Skills and expertise—developing highly technical skills
Operational efficiencies and
decentralization of functions Cost—human and financial
IR function, and senior management. As an enabler, culture can be the key ingredient in a recipe that gives rise to competitive and innovative behavior in the higher education marketplace.
Methods
The purpose of this study is to examine whether or not KM principles as described in the knowledge management field were evident and employed at Western University. This analysis uniquely explores deeply seeded beliefs about what the three departments that make up the IR function believed were their strengths. The analysis is a case study using various qualitative techniques.
This approach adds depth of understanding as to how IR and strategic planning departments make use of or do not employ KM principles. We should be cognizant however, that this approach is not absent of its limitations, but it is a powerful approach to provide a fuller picture of how KM is used in practice.
Western University (a pseudonym) was selected for this study because it demonstrated a need to take raw data and move it efficiently and effectively through a continuum, beginning with raw facts and numbers and ending with decision-making and planning decisions. Having such a seamless process would be vital to the institution’s ability to compete effectively in the market- place. Further, an effective flow of data toward knowledge creation would help the university.
Western is a public research extensive university with an approximate student body enrollment of 37,000. This university was selected because its IR and strategic planning function has undergone a transformation with respect to its organizational hierarchy. Prior to the reorganization, the IR function within the organization was spread across three separate units. That is, the three units that make up the IR function at Western were: (1) decision & planning support; (2) institutional planning & special services; and (3) assessment and enrollment research. The decision support unit reported to a director, who in turn reported to a senior administrator that oversaw resources in the academic affairs area.
The planning unit was managed by a coordinator who also reported to the senior administrator in the academic affairs area. The assessment and enroll- ment research unit reported to a different senior administrator in academic affairs, a vice president for undergraduate education (see Figure 1).
Memoranda and various forms of correspondence from a study committee that was formed to examine the various IR functions and its committee members were analyzed. The author placed himself as a participant observer in some of the data gathering and analysis, providing valuable access to information.