CHAPTER FIVE Analysis and Discussion
5.8 Key correlations applicable to the study
5.8.2 Use of collected data/information (from scanning of environment) as a means of redefining of institutional strategy vs. use of knowledge (derived from KM
systems) to redefine institutional processes and operations
Variables Constructs Correlation
The data/information collected (through scanning of environment) is used by your Division/Department as a means of:
‘redefining Institutional strategy’
Scanning (data Collection)
0.700, (p<0.05) The knowledge gathered from Knowledge
Management systems is being used to:
‘redefine processes and operations’
Learning (Action Taken)
Table 21: Use of collected data/information (for redefining of institutional strategy) vs.
use of knowledge (from KM systems) to redefine institutional processes and operations
There was a strong positive correlation between the use of data collected (through scanning of HE environment) for redefining institutional strategy and the use of KM towards the redefinition of the institutions’ processes and operations of the institution. Universities in other parts of the world from both developed and other developing countries are using knowledge derived from KM systems to redefine their processes and operations that in turn contribute to institutional strategy development. This in turn promotes a knowledge based environment across the institution which then drives the overall institutional strategy. This finding is supported by abundant similar studies such as Metaxiotis and Psarras (2003), Chandarasupsang, et al. (2006), Kende, Noszkay and Seres (2007), Laal (2010), Omona, van der Weide and Lubega (2010), Sahay and Mehta (2010), Lubega, Omona and van der Weide (2011) and Ghaffari, Rafeie and Ashtiani (2012) among others.
145 5.8.3 Use of collected data/information (from scanning of environment) as a means of redefining of institutional strategy vs. use of knowledge (derived from KM systems) to monitor and improve academic and research methods, standards and output
Variables Constructs Correlation
The data/information collected (through scanning of environment) is used by your Division/Department as a means of:
‘Redefining Institutional strategy’
Scanning (data Collection)
0.702 (p<0.05) The knowledge gathered from Knowledge
Management systems is being used to ‘monitor and improve academic and research methods, standards and output’
Learning (Action Taken)
Table 22: Use of collected data/information (for redefining of institutional strategy) vs.
use of knowledge (from KM systems) to monitor and improve academic and research methods, standards and output
This correlation reveals a significantly strong and positive association. It shows that the data/information collected (through scanning of the HE environment) and use of that data towards redefining institutional strategy is positively related to the use of knowledge (derived from KM systems) for the monitoring and improvement of academic and research methods, standards and output. Similarly to the preceding argument (5.8.2), KM is widely used by universities in both developed and other developing countries to improve academic and research methods, standards and output (Metaxiotis and Psarras, 2003; Chandarasupsang, et al., 2006; Cranfield and Taylor, 2008; Williams, Karousou and Mackness, 2011; Silvia and Beatriz, 2012).
146 5.8.4 Use of collected data/information (from scanning of environment) as a means of improving pedagogical practices vs. the use of e-Learning to improve Academic Teaching and Learning at the institution
Variables Constructs Correlation
The data/information collected (through scanning of environment) is used by your Division/Department as a means of:
‘improving pedagogical practices’
Scanning (data Collection)
(0.750, p<0.05) The main reason/s for the use of e-Learning at
your institution is to: ‘Improve academic teaching and learning at the institution’
Efficient
Firms/Competitive Advantage
Table 23: Use of collected data/information (as a means of improving pedagogical practices) vs. the use of e-Learning to improve Academic Teaching and Learning at the
institution
This finding shows that there is a strong positive correlation between the use of collected data/information (from scanning) as a means of improving pedagogical practices and the use of e-Learning to improve academic Teaching and Learning at the institution. In other words, the use of e-Learning to improve academic teaching and learning is significantly related to the improvement of pedagogical practices at these leading institutions. E-Learning is widely used in developed countries as a strategic tool in teaching, learning and research (Marshall, et al., 2003; Krajcso, 2009; Boling, et al., 2012).
For greater effectiveness and outreach, academic teaching and learning must be able to go beyond the traditional face-to-face classroom routine and be accessible across space and time.
E-Learning becomes a strategic means of embracing this as it provides a technology enabled learning platform in real-time and eliminates barriers, allowing learning to occur anywhere and at any time. This promotes more effective knowledge creation and dissemination in HE and this is occurring throughout the world. This is supported by Alias, et al. (2012) who considered e-Learning as a strategic method that has led to the creation of a new pedagogical era for HE. In addition, studies by various authors (Marshall, et al., 2003; Leem and Lim, 2007; Krajcso, 2009; Xiangqian and Fuqing, 2012) show how e-Learning has improved academic teaching and learning in various parts of the world.
147 5.8.5 Use of collected data/information (from scanning of environment) as a means of redefining of institutional strategy vs. use of KM systems and practices to promote continuous learning
Variables Constructs Correlation
The data/information collected (through scanning of environment) is used by your Division/Department as a means of:
‘Redefining Institutional strategy’
Scanning (data Collection)
0.662 (p<0.05) The use of Knowledge Management systems
and practices at your institution has ‘provided a means of continuous learning’
Learning (Action Taken)
Table 24: Use of collected data/information (as a means of redefining of institutional strategy) vs. use of KM systems and practices to promote continuous learning
Furthermore, there is a positive correlation between the use of data collected (through scanning of HE environment) for redefining institutional strategy and the use of KM systems and practices as a means of continuous learning. This reinforces the argument that KM is a facilitator of a Learning Organisation as demonstrated by Bhatt and Zaveri (2002), Bontis, Crossan and Hulland (2002), Farrell and Oczkowski (2002), Garcia-Morales, Llorens-Montes and Verdu-Jover (2007) and Hung, et al. (2011) among others.
5.8.6 Frequency of institutional presentations on Knowledge Management/Business Intelligence vs. the use of Web 2.0 to make the institution a better knowledge provider to students
Variables Constructs Correlation
How often are you required to make institutional presentations on Knowledge Management and Business Intelligence?
Basic Underlying Assumptions
(0.593, p<0.05) The use of Web 2.0 (Social Media, Podcasting,
Wiki’s, Blogs) has ‘Made your institution a better knowledge provider to students’
Efficient Firms/
Competitive Advantage
Table 25: Frequency of institutional KM/BI presentations vs. the use of Web 2.0 to make the institution a better knowledge provider to students
148 There is a strong positive correlation between how often institutional presentations are made on KM and BI and the use of Web 2.0 to make the institution a better knowledge provider to students. It is important for KM to become institutional wide to enabling its potential to be realised by Executive Management at the institutions. The only way this is possible is to make regular institutional KM presentations along with designated drivers or champions of KM in order to make KM visible to the greater university. This relates to Cranfield and Taylor (2008) when their study showed that 2 out of 7 universities surveyed in the United Kingdom had an institutional wide approach to KM and were therefore leading in regard to environmental changes, technological changes and process improvement. This is also supported by other authors such as Laal (2010). Similarly, Omona, van der Weide and Lubega (2010) found that KM needed to be integrated into institutional processes and objectives in order to work strategically which could then ensure both institutional and KM success. Therefore, the more KM presentations inclusive of Web 2.0, that are made to the Executive Management of the institutions, the more likely the usage of Web 2.0 will occur in both teaching and learning which will in turn make the institution a better knowledge provider to students.
This finding also supports the Organisation Culture Theory (Schein, 1985). An organisation’s culture must be viewed as its key competitive advantage and needs to be supportive and aligned towards activities, process and strategies that lead to organisational success (Serrat, 2009). In light of this, KM itself needs to be instilled into the institution’s culture. This again can be possible via frequent and institutional-wide KM presentations. This is supported by similar studies that use the theory in successful IS and KM adoption and implementation. A good example is Alavi, Kayworth and Leidner (2006) who emphasised how organisational culture was a key factor that influenced KM strategy within an organisation which also included KM technology selection, adoption and migration and KM evolution. From a HE perspective, Omerzel, Biloslavo and Trnavčevič (2011) found that different organisational cultures influenced the adoption of KM systems and methods for knowledge creation and transfer among certain staff. Other studies that also support this finding in relation to organisational culture include Park, Ribeire and Schulte (2004), Jones, Cline and Ryan (2006), Leidner and Kayworth (2006), Iivari and Huisman (2007) and Shao, Feng and Liu (2012).
149 5.8.7 Frequency of institutional presentations on Knowledge Management/Business Intelligence vs. use of knowledge (derived from KM systems) to provide reliable reporting for executive management/board meetings
Variables Constructs Correlation
How often are you required to make institutional presentations on Knowledge Management and Business Intelligence?
Basic Underlying Assumptions
(0.675, p<0.01) The knowledge gathered from the Knowledge
Management systems is being used to ‘Provide reliable reporting for executive management/board meetings’
Learning (Action Taken)
Table 26: Frequency of institutional KM/BI presentations vs. use of knowledge (from KM systems) to provide reliable reporting for Executive Management
It was also shown that there is a positive correlation between the frequency of institutional KM and BI presentations and the provision of reliable knowledge reporting to Executive Management. Knowledge Management and BI needs to be made more visible and more institutional wide (Laal 2010, Omona, van der Weide and Lubega, 2010) as so its value can be realised at Executive Level. Executive decisions can then become driven by KM and BI and this can facilitate better decision-making at executive level. This then places KM as the driver of improved decision-making and institutional strategy development that can enhance an organisation in terms of performance, productivity and overall institutional strategy (Metaxiotis and Psarras, 2003; Chen et al., 2009; Laal 2010; Lubega, Omona and van der Weide 2011; Pircher and Pausits, 2011).
150 5.8.8 Level of importance given to KM Information Systems for transforming data into knowledge vs. use of knowledge (derived from KM systems) to monitor and improve academic and research methods, standards and output
Variables Constructs Correlation
How important are Knowledge Management Information Systems for transforming data into knowledge
Process &
Transformation of Knowledge
Interpretation (data given
meaning) (0.694,
p<0.01) The knowledge gathered from the Knowledge
Management systems is being used to monitor and improve academic and research methods, standards and output
Learning (Action Taken)
Table 27: Level of importance given to KM Information Systems vs. use of knowledge (from KM systems) to monitor and improve academic and research methods, standards
and output
Results revealed a strong positive correlation between the importance given to KM systems and the use of these system to improve academic and research methods, standards and output (0.694, p<0.01). Studies by Loh, et al. (2003), Chandarasupsang, et al. (2006), Delavari, Phon-Amnuaisuk and Beikzadeh (2008), Sahay and Mehta (2010) and Ghaffari, Rafeie and Ashtiani (2012) found that when KM and BI Information Systems are integrated into academic teaching, learning and research, it leads to significant benefits such an improvement in quality, productivity, efficiency, interactivity, collaboration and flexibility which inevitable lead to holistic enhancement of academic and research standards and output. Academic and research standards and output are the most critical aspect of any university which in turn leads to the generation and dissemination of knowledge (Oosterlinck and Leuven, 2002;
Metaxiotis and Psarras, 2003).
151 5.8.9 Provision of Knowledge Management systems to facilitate academic research vs.
use of knowledge (derived from KM systems) to monitor and improve academic and research methods, standards and output
Variables Constructs Correlation
Does your Division/Department provide Knowledge Management systems that facilitate academic research?
Knowledge Creation
Knowledge Transfer
(0.641, p<0.05) The knowledge gathered from Knowledge
Management systems is being used to:
‘monitor and improve academic and research methods, standards and output’
Learning (Action Taken)
Table 28: Provision of KM systems to facilitate academic research vs. use of knowledge (from KM systems) to monitor and improve academic and research methods, standards
and output
This result is an interesting one as it shows a positive relationship between the provision of KM systems to facilitate academic research and the use of knowledge gathered from KM systems to monitor and improve academic and research methods, standards and output.
Research activities are one of the primary drivers of knowledge creation and innovation at universities (Metaxiotis, et al., 2003; Chandarasupsang, et al., 2006). Findings and views by Harel and Sitko (2003), Loh, et al. (2003), Metaxiotis, et al. (2003) and Kalaiselvi and Uma (2010) highlight the strategic roles of KM systems for enhancing the areas of research in Higher Education in various parts of the world. This in turn contributes to the improvement of research standards, methods and output.
This is also linked to organisational learning as academic research creates knowledge and promotes learning and as asserted by Lubega, Omona and van der Weide (2011), HE institutions need to align operational processes and organisational learning with KM technology to achieve their goals.
152 5.8.10 Use of knowledge (derived from KM systems) to identify new methods/ways of operating vs. the use of Knowledge Management systems and practices to promote continuous learning
Variables Constructs Correlation
The knowledge gathered from the Knowledge Management systems is being used to:
‘identify new methods/ways of operating’
Knowledge Capabilities
(0.631, p<0.05) The use of Knowledge Management systems
and practices at your institution has ‘provided a means of continuous learning’
Learning (Action Taken)
Table 29: Use of knowledge (from KM systems) to identify new methods/ways of operating vs. the use of KM systems and practices to promote continuous learning Results indicate a strong correlation between the use of KM to identify new methods and ways of operating and the use of KM systems and practices to promote continuous learning at the institutions. Tippins and Sohi (2003), Garcia-Morales, Llorens-Montes and Verdu-Jover (2007), Phang, Kankanhalli and Ang (2008) and namely, Hung et al. (2011) found that organisation learning through KM fostered innovation and newer methods of processes and operations. This holistically can allow the institutions’ to ‘learn’ to identify new and innovative ways of improving their institution through KM.
5.8.11 Provision of KM systems to facilitate academic research vs. the use of KM