Strategic knowledge management in aerospace

industries: a case study

Mostafa Jafari, Jalal Rezaeenour, Peyman Akhavan and Mehdi N. Fesharaki
Department of Industrial Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran

Abstract
Purpose – The objective of this paper is to develop a model for planning and establishment of knowledge management (KM) strategy in one of
the
Iranian Sub-stream Aerospace Industries Organization to improve company’s performance.
Design/methodology/approach – This research tries to use multi-method approach by integrating balanced score card, which is a
renowned strategic management approach, and Nonaka and colleagues’ knowledge creation process (socialization, externalization,
combination, and internalization model), which is a well-known knowledge creation and conversion model, being adopted as the foundations of
strategic knowledge management model (SKMM).
Findings – The analytical approach identifies eight issues as critical success factors of the knowledge strategy map in this case study. The
overall results from the case study are positive as well, thus reflecting the appropriateness of the suggested SKMM model.
Research limitations/implications – SKMM can be used to help forward the plan, establishment and evaluation of KM strategies and initiatives.
This helps to ensure that the essential issues are covered during design and implementation phases of KM strategies.
Originality/value – This paper further provides an integrated perspective of KM metrics in high-tech industries including the aerospace industry. It
gives valuable information and guidelines that hopefully will help leaders to consider important issues during performance measurement of KM
strategies in organizations.

Keywords Knowledge management, Strategic planning, Aerospace industry, Iran

Paper type Case

study

q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 1748-8842]

Introduction [DOI 10.1108/00022661011028128]

“Knowledge is power”, particularly in the current era. No

matter what you name it as cooperation, decision support,
knowledge management (KM) or some other thing – that is
the fundamental principle which supports nowadays’
corporate strategies ( Jafari et al., 2009). There are various
definitions about KM in the literature. Quintas et al. (1997)
state that:
Knowledge management is the process of continually managing knowledge
of all kinds to meet existing and emerging needs, to identify and exploit
existing and acquired knowledge assets and to develop new opportunities.

There are various models for management of knowledge and

intellectual capital (IC) (Mertins et al., 2003; Nonaka and
Takeuchi, 1995; Wiig, 1997). But, they have some
shortcomings in describing the way KM can be established
in real world. In other words, they show an extremely general
manner while they have inadequate tools for effective KM
strategy development (Tat and Hase, 2007).
In addition to contributions to the economic and national
pride of any country, the aerospace industry manufactures high-
value-added artifacts and works as a knowledge base for other
industries. KM in aerospace systems, can be found in
communities and groups, that are acting diverse functions in
design and development activities (Holm, 2005). Recently,
aerospace firms are characterized by complicated technology

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1748-8842.htm

Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology: An International Journal

82/1 (2010) 60 – 74

60
equipped with expensive machinery and a large number of
experts. Consequently, practical know-how should be totally
precise. Like other corporations, majority of aerospace firms are
trying to outsource more and focus on their own core
competencies. Therefore, it seems that KM is in the center of
attention in most of these companies (Jafari et al., 2007a). It is
striking that, providing an environment which promotes
organizational learning and encourages positive changes
towards it has been reported as core component in
knowledge-intensive organizations (Akhavan et al., 2006;
Lin and Kuo, 2007).
Aerospace Industries Organization (AIO) is a serious
component of Iran industrial core, since it employs a large
number of highly paid, highly skilled workers in knowledge-
intensive jobs. AIO have a valuable source of knowledge,
product, and process technologies and complicated
manufacturing. Design and development of products in AIO
rely on the productive use of a lot of employees who have
combinations of education, skills, and experience. Having said
that, AIO can be categorized as a knowledge-intensive
organization. From past ten years, Iran has been seeking a
master plan to capture the space by launching national satellites.
AIO leaders have faith in KM to prevent them from reiterating
their mistakes. Also, they believe that it can help them to learn
from their achievements and grasp their vision about capturing
the space. Considering aforementioned reasons, a KM program
has been initiated in various sub-stream companies of AIO.
In this way, one of the most important aims of this study is to
provide an explanation about strategic management of
knowledge in such a knowledge-intensive organization.
Despite the fact that too much literature has been published
about KM as a whole, and many recommendations exist about
linkage between KM, corporate strategy and organizational
performance (Bontis et al., 1999; Bose, 2004), not enough

61
Strategic KM in aerospace industries: a case study Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology: An International Journal
Mostafa Jafari et al. Volume 82 · Number 1 · 2010 · 60 – 74
 Strategic KM in aerospace industries: a case study Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology: An International Journal
Mostafa Jafari et al. Volume 82 · Number 1 · 2010 · 60 – 74

theory can be found about the influences of measurement on tackle this problem. Also, Nonaka and Konno (1998)
KM. Although there are many KM cases, a considerable recommend an impressive equivalent concept namely Ba.
number of them has been unsuccessful at effective management Knowledge strategy includes considerations about the future
of knowledge (Choo and Bontis, 2002). Lacking a descriptive knowledge needs and a plan for filling the gaps between current
measurement report about KM programs, leaders cannot make knowledge and required knowledge. Knowledge needs here
sure about their effectiveness and obstacles to their progress. So, may refer to the knowledge resources and desired knowledge for
directors seek ways to assess the influences of KM attempts on organization. There are different KM strategies such as:
firm’s performance. It is necessary to use acceptable universal knowledge creation, knowledge transfer, knowledge
measures in order to express the outcomes of KM and to protection, knowledge strategy as business strategy,
persuade directors about its value. Despite advancement of KM intellectual asset management strategy and personal
measurement approaches during these years, it is necessary to knowledge strategy (Bloodgood and Salisbury, 2001; Wiig,
pay more attention to this subject and try to develop and 1997). Each of these strategies above has its own advantage and
standardize these methods (Bose, 2004; Mertins et al., 2003). disadvantage, but the knowledge creation strategy is the
It is time to define the core research question which is: perquisite of the others. Knowledge creation acts like a vital
RQ1. In which way a corporation can establish a KM armor in the globalized economy. In other words, it seems that
strategy to advance firm’s performance? knowledge creating is the most significant determinant of
organizational efficiency degree (Nonaka et al., 2000, 2005;
Useful knowledge strategy can assist aerospace industry in Song, 2008). Because of this enormous consideration,
collecting key knowledge, enhancing firm intelligence and knowledge creation is at the center of attention, and plenty of
improving its core competencies. So, a KM strategy was academic models have been conducted in accordance with it.
scheduled in one of the Iran Sub-stream Aerospace Industries So, we pursue this notion and are in agreement with SECI
Organization (SAIO). This paper is to discuss management of model about knowledge creation process (Nonaka, 1991). This
knowledge strategy in one of the SAIO. Core objectives of this model has been repeatedly utilized in various academic and
research are: practical situations (Chou, 2005).
.
Developing a model for planning and implementing KM Nonaka, in collaboration with some authors developed a
strategy in combination with balanced scorecard (BSC) comprehensive model to demonstrate process of knowledge
approach (Kaplan and Norton, 1992) and socialization, creation in organizations in the early 1990s. The SECI model
externalization, combination, and internalization (SECI) was initially presented in Nonaka (1991). But it was modified
model (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995). and developed for an extensive usage in his book in Nonaka and
.
Implementation and analysis of the developed model in Takeuchi (1995). This model represents a dynamic interaction
one of the SAIO. between two types of knowledge (i.e. tacit and explicit) in a
spiral process, which helps knowledge to be improved by the
way of interaction between individuals, groups, and
Knowledge management organizations. In other words, cooperation between
It is time to identify the differences between data, information individuals and groups inside an encouraging organizational
and knowledge. Data are raw happenings, with no meaning. background creates knowledge and develops its value. A bit
Information can be considered as data with given meaning via later, Nonaka and Konno (1998) also recommended the
relational link and context. Knowledge can be seen as necessity to construct a suitable space where knowledge
information with direction for action on the basis of insight creation and transfer take place, namely Ba.
and experience (Lillrank, 2002). Considering the differences From Nonaka’s viewpoint, knowledge is created and
between data, information and knowledge, this paper takes developed in a nonstop cycle of SECI (Figure 1).
ideas from Polanyi (1966) to define tacit and explicit Socialization refers to creation of novel tacit knowledge by
knowledge. Tacit knowledge is related to individuals’ private way of shared experiences. Instances of such a knowledge are
skills, backdrop, and learning characteristics, and so it is skills and shared mental models. The outcome of such a process
difficult to record. Explicit knowledge denotes knowledge is named “experiential knowledge”. Externalization refers to
which can be easily articulated, transmitted, and documented. conversion of tacit knowledge into explicit one, so-called
We define KM as a collection of organizational activities which “conceptual knowledge”. Examples are models, hypotheses,
assists forward identification, catch, organization, storage, concepts, analogies or metaphors. Combination refers to
transfer, application, and measurement of knowledge and
speeds up knowledge creation with respect to organizational
strategy. Figure 1 The SECI
Management science is well-known due to its fashions and process
fads. Some researchers believe that KM can be seen like other Socialization Externalization
management fads (Wilson, 2002; Ponzi and Koenig, 2002). Experiential Conceptual
Also some others emphasized that KM will never be a fad just knowledge knowledge
in the circumstance that it can be correctly supported (Jain,
2009; Laycock, 2005). Also, some authors have criticized KM Routine Systemic
and/or suggested new directions for research. For instance, knowledge knowledge
Wilson’s (2002) perspective about KM just turns around hard Internalization Combination
features of KM like information management. In contrast
with Wilson, some authors like Hildreth and Kimble (2002)
argue that communities of practices (COPs) can be used to Source: Adapted from Nonaka et al. (2000)
conversion of explicit knowledge into more organized and Performance measurement methods for
complicated collection of explicit knowledge, so-called KM strategies
“systemic knowledge”. Samples are classifying, linking,
adding and sorting explicit knowledge. And finally, KM literature represents an extensive spectrum of KM
internalization refers to changing explicit knowledge into tacit measurement tools. Fairchild (2002) reviewed KM
knowledge of individuals. Internalization creates “routine measurement methods and talked about the employment of
knowledge”. Exercise, training and learning by doing are BSC to define a relationship between KM utilization and IT
essential to adopt explicit knowledge. The SECI model, while strategy. Mitri (2003) noticed the difficulty level of tacit
knowledge evaluation and its performance in education centers,
widely used, has also been criticized. For instance, Hildreth and
and developed a decision support system for evaluation of tacit
Kimble (2002) claim: “the flaw in Nonaka’s spiral of knowledge
knowledge in a KM context. Smits and de Moor (2004)
is in the tacit-explicit stage.” Some authors (Teece, 1998) proposed an extensive approach to identify performance indices
believe that this is not a trouble and have a certain opinion that for KM in COPs. They provided an approach for measuring
tacit knowledge is only hard to articulate. This paper tries to performance of COPs within a KM program. Hong-bing and
strengthen the impact of the knowledge creation theory and Lei (2007) introduced a set of input/output measures for
concentrates on social viewpoint of knowledge that simply exists efficiency analysis of KM for project-based firms using data
in Nonaka SECI model. envelopment analysis (DEA) method. Chen et al. (2008)
developed a method for appraising KM performance based on
linguistic variables and fuzzy sets theory.
Knowledge evaluation approaches consist of a variety of
Research methodology methods and models for recognition, categorization and
Each research has its characteristics that help researcher to assessment of organizations’ knowledge. Especially, IC can be
select an appropriate methodology. Based on the points used as a major notion to examine organizational knowledge
discussed above, the authors’ recent researches on KM assets. There are also a variety of methods and tools for
evaluating IC. In the well-known categorization recommended
(Akhavan et al., 2006; Jafari et al., 2007a, b), the research
by Sveiby (2001-2005), the available approaches to assess IC
framework of this study has been developed on three main
divide into four taxonomies including market capitalization
stages as shown in Figure 2. methods (MCM), return on assets (ROA), SC and direct
In this way, at the first stage of this research, some intellectual capital (DIC) Methods. MCM approaches are used
measurement approaches and categories of KM and IC will to financially appraise the overall value of intangible resources.
be introduced. Then, we will focus on scorecard (SC) category These methods evaluate IC in general, usually by way of the gap
based on its advantages among the other measurement between the book and market value of the organization. ROA
approaches. The BSC method seems good for usage in the tools, assess the intangible assets by means of typical financial
rest of research, so in the second stage the strategic KM model indices on the organizational level similar to the first group. The
will be developed by integrating BSC with the SECI model. SC methods try to represent intangibles by way of non-
Note that in this model we want to replace the traditional four financial indices. DIC models, likewise assess various IC
BSC perspectives with the four dimensions of the SECI model. taxonomies distinctly by means of financial measures
The developed model is too complicated and so, it needs to (Sveiby, 2001,
describe in an explanatory manner. Also, we try to discuss 2001-2005).
verification of the proposed model, and seek to indicate the The monetary-based approaches like MCM and ROA are
suitability of the model for the SAIO. In this way, a suitable for comparisons among firms in the same industry. In
questionnaire will be designed to evaluate beliefs of AIO other words, these methods can be used to represent the
experts about basic elements of the proposed model. In the third monetary value of IC. In addition, since they are based on
accepted accounting regulations, they are simply adopted
stage, the proposed model will be implemented in the SAIO in a
between accounting practitioners. Their problematic condition
six-month period, and we seek to analyze the outcomes of its
is that by transforming anything into monetary values, the
implementation. Finally, the results of research will be results will be superficial. Strength points of the SC and DIC
concluded in the end part and further studies will be proposed tools refer to their abilities to represent a better inclusive
for all KM interesting organizations. depiction of organizational status than monetary-based
measures. Furthermore, these approaches can be simply
implemented at all levels of organizations while they
Figure 2 Research framework represent more precise picture than financial indices. A
variety of organizations including private, public, non-profit
and non-governmental organizations, and also internal
sections of organizations have
esta in the SAIO
1-Reviewing 2-Evaluating KM metric models
Literature blis
KM metrics
review hme
models
nt 5-Describing
SKMM stages
SKMM 4-Developing
developing SKMM
8-Mapping knowledge strategy

7-SKMM
SKMM
establishment
 3-Model selection & found d four
description
these categori
method es.
6-Verification of s useful. In
SKMM
Their additio
weaknes n to
9-Analysis of results ses consid
refer to erable
their advant
context ages
ual of SC
measure metho
s which ds
change which
for are
every shown
compan in Table
y and I, there
every are
intentio other
n, and consider
this ations to
issue adopt
makes BSC for
compari assessin
sons a g KM
little strategy.
hard. First,
Also, BSC is
their a
emersio progress
n refers ively
to a few
years
ago, and
so they
cannot
be
simply
accepted
by
directors
and
practiti
oners
who get
used to
analyze
all
perform
ances
financial
ly
(Sveiby,
2001-
2005).
Table I
shows
the
compari
sons
between
the
explaine
Table I Intellectual capital assessment approaches
Direct IC Market capitalization Return on assets SC methods Criterion
U X U X Ability to monetary appraisal (Sveiby, 2001-2005)
U X U X Ability to compare similar companies (Sveiby, 2001-2005)
X U X U Insensitivity to interest rate (Sveiby, 2001-2005)
U X X U Ability to use on any organizational level (Sveiby, 2001-2005)
U X X U Ability to represent knowledge status (Sveiby, 2001-2005)
U X X U Applicability for non-profit firms (Bose, 2004; Salterio and Webb, 2003)
X X X U Being user friendly and flexible (Sveiby, 2001-2005; Groene et al., 2009; Steele,
X X X U 2001) popular (Bose, 2004; Salterio and Webb, 2003)
Being
well-liked method for directed towards aims; updating reporting system; and
assessing organizational depicting “the process strategy; upgrading conducting some
performance, and also it is for transforming modifications to reward
broadly accepted in KM intangible assets into system.
literature (Bose, 2004; tangible customer and 5 Routine function.
Salterio and Webb, 2003). financial outcomes” Upgrading data; analyzing
Second, BSC can be providing “a framework for and reporting
customized to carry out describing and managing in a regular process;
specific organizational strategy in the knowledge upgrading measures;
strategic objectives economy” (Kaplan and evaluating outcomes;
(Groene et al., 2009; Norton, 2001). A preparing and
Steele, 2001). Third, since standard BSC approach distributing outcomes;
BSC was presented in the has stages like what comes and modifying process.
early 1990s, numerous after (Mountain State
firms have been using it for Group, 2005; Niven, D
systematically performance 2003): e
enhancement (Bose, 2004; 1 Preparation evaluation. v
Salterio and Webb, 2003). Recognizing e
Fourth, BSC has been requirements and
resources, and also
l
frequently incorporated in
verifying commitment o
the other performance
approaches, that can help of management. p
us to use their experiences 2 Prog ramming. i
(Smits and de Moor, Assigning n
2004; Groene et al., 2009). workgroup’s leader g
Fifth, the resemblances and participators;
between KM and BSC, performing an
examination about S
make authors like Petty
organization’s mission, K
and Guthrie (2000) and
Bontis et al. (1999), and vision and strategy; M
another ones recommend allocating objectives to M
that BSC must be an perspectives; creating
Explicit and tacit are two
essential part of IC. strategy map;
types of knowledge.
In the early 1990s, recognizing indices and Resemblance can be found
the BSC was just a taking collective between tacit knowledge
performance agreement about the and human capital. Also,
assessment method indices; and building there are similarities
(Kaplan and Norton, execution program. between explicit knowledge
1992). Then it upgraded 3 Execution. Entering and structural capital.
to a strategy objectives/critical success Experiential and routine
implementation approach factors
knowledge are the main
in Kaplan and Norton (CSFs) and indices components of human
(1996, 1997). At last, it into system by way capital. It is striking that,
raised to a higher of training or software; both of them are sub-
standard which was a creating SCs; classes of tacit knowledge.
strategy management determining warning As well, systemic and
method (Kaplan and levels and criteria, data conceptual knowledge
Norton, 2001, 2004). In integration regulations; are the major parts of
other words, first, the describing report structural capital. This
concentration was on the templates; bringing in and that together are
basis of measure data; and producing instances of explicit
developments in four reports. knowledge. Structural
perspectives. These 4 Incor poration. capital includes intangible
Merging BSC with assets ready for use while
perspectives include
other supportive personnel exit the
“internal business
processes; organization like internal
processes”, “customer”,
communicating with process/systems knowledge,
“financial”, and “learning
personnel; assigning procedures, knowledge
and growth”. Then BSC
and empowering bases, etc. Therefore, for
progressively advanced
responsible persons for setting up knowledge
and became a strategic
data gathering; creation strategy, it is
management approach
explaining BSC needed to expand
knowledge in its whole issues which must be
dimensions, containing: taken into account
routine, systemic, including existing
conceptual, and resources in connection
experiential knowledge with available information
(Smits and de Moor, technology infrastructure,
2004). proficiency and time of
In this paper, authors personnel, and cost of
have applied the four professional aid if
dimensions of necessary. Eventually, an
SECI model instead of important subject to
BSC terms for consider is to make sure
development of the new about the powerful
approach for measuring commitment of
performance of management. It is obvious
knowledge creation that, establishment of
strategies as shown in every performance
Figure 3. In the enhancement process will
following, the activities of denote change. Lacking a
each stage of strategic perfect management
knowledge management commitment, almost
model (SKMM) will be certainly all endeavors for
defined (Kaplan and alteration will be
Norton, 1996; Mountain unsuccessful. SKMM
State Group, 2005; Niven, establishment can cause
2003). important cultural
alteration.
P
r
e
p
a
r
a
t
i
o
n

e
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
Includes recognizing
requirements, identifying
resources and verifying
commitment of
management. The first
domain must think over
is recognizing the
necessity for establishing
a SKMM. Some
evaluations about existing
performance indices can
assist to recognize
troublesome domains.
There are some other
Figure 3 Strategic knowledge management model

EXPERIENTIAL KNOWLEDGE
PERSPECTIVE
 Action
CSFs Measures Criterion
needed

ROUTINE KNOWLEDGE CONCEPTUAL KNOWLEDGE

PERSPECTIVE PERSPECTIVE
STRATEGY OF
Action KNOWLEDGE Action
CSFs Measures Criterion CSFs Measures Criterion
needed CREATION needed

SYSTEMIC KNOWLEDGE
PERSPECTIVE

Action
CSFs Measures Criterion needed

Programming can explain the particular objects an organization is supposed

Consists of assigning leader and participators for SKMM to do well to implement its KM strategy. Action verbs like
workgroup; performing an evaluation about mission, vision and raise, decrease, enhance, obtain, and those of the same type,
strategy; allocating objectives/CSFs to SKMM perspectives, are frequently used to describe CSFs. After formal approval of
creating KM strategy map, recognizing indices and taking CSFs, and subsequent to KM strategy mapping, the following
collective agreement about KM indices; and building execution questions should be answered (Mountain State Group, 2005):
program. While the SKMM workgroup is identified, an .
Have all the essential components been considered? Does
examination about the vision, mission, objectives, and the KM strategy map show a sufficient cause and effect
strategies (include process or functional strategies) must be reasoning?
done. When the strategic plan is developed, KM strategy is .
Have all the components set up rationally? Does the
checked to decide how it can make ready for the four SKMM reasoning seem abstractly logical?
perspectives. Maybe, a number of corporations find it necessary .
Do the CSFs guide us to successful implementation of the
to supplement some other perspectives. However, we preferred KM strategy?
to concentrate on these four perspectives. For instance, two .
Is there a balance in our attempts to attain the KM
comprehensive objectives “increase in internal systematic strategy?
knowledge” and “increase in external systematic knowledge”,
can be categorized to fit in systemic knowledge perspective. Akhavan et al. (2006) and Jafari et al. (2007a) by examining
Taking KM strategy into account, then it is necessary to various references, identified some critical dimensions that
recognize CSFs of KM strategy and build a strategy map of KM. can be used in selecting KM CSFs as showed in Table II.
Rockart (1979) defined CSFs as “the limited number of areas in With no KM strategy map, it is really hard to explain KM
which satisfactory results will ensure successful competitive strategy modifications. Figure 4 is a diagrammatical depiction
performance for the individual, department or organization”. to illustrate how a KM strategy map can be built. Every
A KM strategy map depicts how a corporation generates organization should first consider its KM objectives and
knowledge and represents CFSs in every KM perspective. strategy, and then create a suitable map. After the creation
A KM strategy map shows a chain of CSFs in order to achieve of map, it is time to identify particular indices which can be
organizational KM strategy. It prepares an illustrative picture utilized to follow achievement of KM CSFs. A SKMM is
which displays the cause and effect relationship among different supposed to contain a mixture of lead and lag indices. Lag
KM CSFs. The quantity of CSFs in a KM strategy map does not indices measure the outcomes of process, when lead indices
follow any strict and fixed standard. But it seems that fewer measure improvement in the direction of the process
CSFs are usually better (Mountain State Group, 2005). (Mountain State Group, 2005).
According to Niven’s (2003) suggestion, a limited number of The fundamental purpose in choosing particular indices for a
CSFs especially more than ten and less than 20, seems good for SC is detection of the indicators which are best suited for the
a BSC process establishment. KM strategy. After the indicator selection, the SKMM
Appropriate CSFs can give accurate explanation of the workgroup had to expend time to purify the indicators,
intention. A good selection can delineate for what reason the allocate responsible persons, and determine data necessities.
CSFs are essential, and also can explain in what way the CSFs In this stage, it seems fine to collect personnel opinions about
join in the cause and effect chain. In addition, succinct CSFs the suitability, feasibility, and rationality of the indicators
(Mountain State Group, 2005).
Table II KM CSFs
Experiential knowledge Conceptual knowledge Routine knowledge Systemic knowledge
Internal interactions Specialized meetings and seminars Specialized training man-hours Internal systemic knowledge
External interactions Communities of practice Number of experience years External systemic knowledge
Trust and organizational culture Knowledge sharing Utilization of knowledge repository Knowledge repositories
Employee’s involvement and Risk-taking climate in the organization Employees training and educations Knowledge architecture
understanding – awareness Flexible and dynamic organizational Continuous learning KM systems
Support and commitment of structure Job enrichment Knowledge structure
CEO (leadership) Integration of KM and current systems Job security IT infrastructure
Benchmarking Human resources management and Systematic approach to KM
Team working motivation
Collaboration and communication
Sources: Adapted from Akhavan et al. (2006); Jafari et al. (2007b)

Figure 4 Knowledge creation strategy map Providing a program for SKMM implementation is final
step in the programming stage. This program must represent
Strategy of Strategy of knowledge creation activity costs, anticipated milestones, risk assessment, a
knowledge
creation declaration of IT, SKMM components, and obvious
To establish knowledge creation strategy, how we can recognition allocated persons. Also, the program must show
Systemic create systemic knowledge based on conceptual knowledge?
knowledge in what way the SKMM data is exchanged all over the firm
To create a basis for systemic knowledge, how we can express and how critiques of personnel can be acquired and
Conceptual conceptual knowledge and externalize it? incorporated. The program should represent the foundation
knowledge

To create conceptual knowledge, how we can create experiential for the execution and incorporation endeavors.
Experiential knowledge based on socialization?
knowledge Execution
To create a basis for experiential knowledge, how we can An obviously well-made program must determine
Routine internalize routine knowledge in minds? organization’s information technology infrastructure, and
knowledge
also its abilities and restrictions. For better data collection,
it is necessary to make required modifications in your IT
infrastructure based on risk assessment outcomes. Purchasing
After general agreement on the indicators, SKMM workgroup a BSC software package is a choice for organizations which
should try to set up targets for the indicators. A lot of KM are preparing for the execution stage. A number of packages
indicators are available for organizations to choose. can be found with the purpose of BSC which can support the
Considering four SKMM perspectives, these indicators may whole process. A list consisting of 15 different BSC packages
be like those in Table III. Indicators must be selected for each can be found at 2GC Company’s web site (www.2gc.co.uk/).
of the perspectives agreed upon. Owing to time-consuming Also, applications of MS Office software like Access and Excel
nature of data gathering for each measure, it is necessary to can really help those organizations which do not have enough
reduce the number of measures to less crucial ones which budget for purchasing standard BSC software packages.
have the following characteristics (Mountain State Group, A SC is a table which illustrates perspectives, CSFs,
2005): measures, targets, warning points, and initiatives or actions
.
connected with the organizational KM strategy; needed. A good SC should help users to identify information
.
not difficult to understand; integration regulations, design diagrams and reports, and
.
can be joined together in an action and reaction chain; bring in past data. Various reports should be provided for
.
can be upgraded regularly; different organizational audiences. For instance, it is best to
.
draw a factual depiction of the process which you are present all information about SKMM perspectives in a
trying to control; and graphical report for management level. Personnel report
.
reachable, measurable, and practical. should contain any information connected with knowledge
processes like knowledge creation and knowledge sharing.
Table IV is an easy way to evaluate if your indicators are fine Reports for board of directorates are more concise than the
nominees for a SKMM establishment. Table IV can be also manager’s report. It is obvious that, the SKMM workgroup
supposed as a work sheet for evaluating the appropriateness of has a responsibility to help different departments and groups
selected KM measures. So, you should assign a score between to define their reports and SCs (Mountain State Group,
1 and 10 for each item listed in Table IV. Then, the sum of 2005). An illustrative report for top manager of SAIO can be
scores for each measure should be calculated. Finally seen in Figure 6.
measures with the best scores can be selected for each CSF.
The scores of measures for each CSF could be between 5 Incorporation
and 50. As mentioned before, if ever consensus on the indices It seems that communicating is the most important feature of
has been obtained, the SKMM workgroup can establish the incorporation stage. In this stage, all participants in
targets for the indicators. SKMM workgroup and the whole managers and personnel
Table III Sample measures for SKMM
Experiential knowledge Routine knowledge Systemic knowledge Conceptual knowledge
Direct communication links Investment in training Number of bytes of project Number of bytes of project
Non-assigned working time Training expense/administrative documents meetings
records
Regulated socialization expense Number of registered experiences of Percentage of hours assigned to
Investment in IT Training expense/employee personnel in knowledge repository project meetings
Length of relationship Average age of employees Number of patents Number of specialized seminars or
Partner satisfaction index Average age of full-time or Number of ISI journals articles workshops
Customer satisfaction index permanent employees Number of scientific conferences or Number of ideas collected from
Customer retention Percentage of company managers journals articles suggestion box
Number of customers with advanced degree Number of new products New processes suggested
Customer lost Percentage of employees with Number of patents field R&D invested in basic research
Average duration of customer advanced degrees Savings from implemented employee R&D invested in product design
relationship Employee turnover suggestions Investments in new product design
Customer visits to the company Frequency of use of knowledge Average age of company patents R&D resources/total resources
Days spent visiting customer repository or knowledge base Ratio of new products
Service expense/customer Number of training man-hours Number of new solutions
IT literacy of customers Average duration of employment Patents pending
Network capability/employee Educational investment Number of processes changed
Relationship investment/customer Share of training hours
Direct communications to customer/ Number of part-time employees
year Hours of training/employee
New markets development
investments
Contribution in projects
Sources: Adapted from CMA (1999); Roos et al. (1998); Bose (2004); Smits and de Moor (2004)
Table IV A template for measure
selection
Scores (assign a grade between 1 and 10 for each item)
Measures/ Coordination Coordination Specific and Sum of
Dimensions CSFs indicators with strategy with the CSF Measurability Accessibility intelligible scores
Systemic CSF 1-1 Measure1-1-1
knowledge ...
.
. ...
Conceptual CSF 2-1 Measure2-1-1
knowledge ...
.
. ...
Experiential CSF 3-1 Measure3-1-1
knowledge ...
.
. ...
Routine CSF 4-1 Measure4-1-1
knowledge ...
.
. ...
Source: Adapted from Niven (2003)

should be aware of the SKMM process. All responsibilities for personnel to contribute to firm’s KM objectives (Mountain
collecting, entering and evaluating the data, and producing State Group, 2005).
the reports should be communicated through this stage. It is
best to prepare worksheet for each measure and submit it to
Routine function
related data collector. This process can help organizations to
This stage is a continuous process and consists of regular data
find those reports and indices that are not helpful. It is highly inputting, information evaluation, and reporting by way of
recommended that all levels create their own SCs according standard procedures. Also some other regular functions such
to the KM CSFs and indicators they may affect. This means as overall outcome evaluation and modification of the whole
“cascading” which is the process of creating arranged SCs in process take place during this stage. Considering the existence
every part of a firm. The act of cascading permits all the of a lot of data, the cause and effect relationships can be easily
assessed to decide whether pre-test of questionnaire, the SAIO, before experience in combination
indicators are truly joined the questionnaire with a tossing into maelstrom with technical know-how
to the determined KM guideline was sent to the of projects, are expected can help AIO personnel to
strategy. Also, it is experts via e-mail. The to pass some precede try for approaching the
required to review CSFs to number of questionnaires training and have a wish of capturing the space.
make sure about their sent out was three-month internship in Considering AIO as a
logical relationships in the 71; the number returned the SAIO. A top-level knowledge-intensive
cause and effect diagram, true questionnaires was designer is appointed as organization, and also
and also to make sure that 42, which administrator of new considering a huge sum of
they are supporting the showed a return rate of employees. New employees knowledge in it, the AIO
KM strategy. It is 59.15 percent of the total will be selected for leaders conclude to plan
noteworthy that, the sent out. After a reliability projects only after and implement a KM
purification process must analysis of the confirmation of the process all over the
conduct for the SKMM questionnaire and administrative designer. organization. AIO was
process continuously confirming it, since the Number of personnel of the considered as a significant
during its life (Mountain distribution of the SAIO is 175 by now and park of research in Iran
State Group, 2005). collected data was not from this, 55 members are and endeavors were
normal, the Binomial non- supportive staff and the concentrated on making
parametric test was used others are technical the organization less
S knowledge workers of the
to determine the difference central. In the new
K between agree and SAIO. Note that, a project organizational structure,
M disagree results. In this control department also there are various process
M case, based on test results helps design functions for and improvement
most of the participants better initiation, planning, workgroups which can
reached consensus on the execution, control, and collaborate easily with
v
model. The ratio expressing finalization of the SAIO each other all over the
e strongly agree and agree on projects. organization. Nowadays,
r questions was over 70 each of AIO’s sub-stream
i percent, showing KM companies (i.e. SAIOs), has
f significant consensus. This initia its specific and unique
i representative sample tives research and development
expressed the opinion that at (R&D) department.
c
“almost all of the basic AIO Sharing of knowledge was
a and
elements of SKMM were defined as a fundamental
t verified”. the characteristic of these
i SAI research centers. Each of
o O these R&D departments
SKM Before evaluating the
n M
was equipped with a KM
establishment of SKMM at division to organize
Before implementation of estab the SAIO, it is necessary to knowledge and assist
SKMM, each of its five lish get more familiar with KM forward knowledge
stages was introduced in a ment initiatives both at AIO and transfer within the
descriptive manner with at the SAIO. organization ( Jafari et
enough templates and
in the
Considering knowledge al.,
cases. Then, a SAIO and its holders (i.e. human 2
questionnaire was designed This research will be capital) as the most 0
to verify the proposed continued by the expensive organizational 0
model by AIO experts’ explanations about the properties, and also taking 7
judgments. The establishment of strategic the short life of a
participants in this survey KM process as the technology into account in ,
were members of the AIO preliminary steps of KM today’s economy, AIO
including managers, senior program in the SAIO based directives realized that b
experts and effective staff in on SKMM. The SAIO has they should try to sustain )
decision making who were a matrix organizational their knowledge assets .
involved in KM efforts. It structure which consists of inside. Individuals’ In addition to AIO’s
is important to say that this four design functions concerns about KM, there
survey was to identify the which collaborate to access were some other worries in
opinions of AIO experts the SAIO missions. The the SAIO. The SAIO has
about SKMM and verify SAIO is project-based and numerous specialists and
the basic elements of its products are the experts in various scientific
model. For confirming this drawings and documents subjects such as
default, nine questions of design and development aerodynamics, propulsion,
were configured and placed projects. Usually, avionics, guidance and
in the questionnaire. After a newcomers who enter control, thermal, satellite,
etc. A large problem of the shaped in the SAIO and
SAIO was losing the knowledge portal was
knowledge workers. This established. The
problem was characteristics and
considerable because experience fields of all
the average years of the technical employees are
technical employees were recorded in this portal.
less than seven years. In This portal also contains
this way, KM initiatives some features for receiving
were started in 2006 in the lessons learned and
SAIO. First of all, a “KM experiences from all
department” was organized members, and for
in the SAIO by integrating reviewing them.
three different sections, Progressively, various
including: library, public knowledge committees in
relations office, and training different knowledge areas
and education office, and a formed in the SAIO.
CKO was appointed in Example of knowledge
order to supervise it. committees were
Usually, new managerial aerodynamics, avionics,
systems cause some adaptor and satellite,
opposition ground equipments, tele-
versus change in command, etc. It is
personnel. The same striking that, these
event took place against committees have a close
the KM in some design relationship with the higher
functions. In this way, the level committees in the
KM department planned AIO. In order to acquire
and held some introductive the SAIO’s knowledge,
seminars and forums about project meetings and
the KM. Several issues like specialized seminars of
SAIO’s knowledge- based projects are planned in
feature, mission project schedules, and
requirements, significance they occur during or at the
of knowledge and KM in end of projects phases.
SAIO and human Scientific and practical
developmental programs relationships with some
for the future were Iranian
discussed in these top-ranked universities
forums. Several pamphlets were started to
and brochures were facilitate
advertized in order to
promote personnel and
directors awareness about
KM and its influences in
different aerospace
organizations all over the
world. These forums and
meetings helped SAIO to
accept alterations and to
adopt KM as a new
process.
Then, organizational
process map was
modified to adapt
with the new process. A
number of organizational
procedures and
instructions were updated
and some new
instructions were added to
existing organizational
regulations. Afterwards, an
experts’ network was
intra-organizational collaboration. Each knowledge defined as: “creating systemic knowledge for developing SAIO’s
committee has at least one academic member from the products and services” which was a knowledge creation
universities who has an active role in the meetings. One of the strategy. Subsequently, a meeting was held between CEO,
most important roles of the academic members is their department managers, and SKMM workgroup. The intention
cooperation in defining various PhD and master’s theses in of this meeting was to make some decisions about CSFs based
collaboration with the other members of the committees. on Brainstorming. In this meeting, all the CSFs in Table II were
In addition to aforementioned initiatives, a comprehensive introduced to the participants. Then, participants were
document management system (DMS) has been established invited to express their beliefs about each of the CSFs. Finally
in the SAIO. Different templates for documentation were after 2 hours discussions, from all CSFs in Table II, eight
designed and spread over the SAIO. In order to increase CSFs were extracted and assigned to the four perspectives of
the volume of knowledge repositories of the SAIO, SKMM and a knowledge strategy map was created as shown in
the knowledge creation strategy is selected for the SAIO. Figure 5.
This section is to discuss management of knowledge creation It is noteworthy that, SKMM workgroup approach in
strategy in the SAIO. Following steps are an example of how selecting CSFs was a social viewpoint of knowledge. As a
one organization can establish a SKMM process. result, most of the CSFs were in connection with social
activities.
Preparation evaluation Following the development of the KM strategy map, some
For this, two sessions were held with chief executive officer appropriate measures from Table III were entered into the
(CEO) achieve his commitment within the SKMM worksheet shown in Table IV and sent to the CEO and
establishment. In these two sessions, preliminaries of SKMM department managers in order to assign scores to the measures.
process were presented to him and resources needed were After collection of the worksheets, by calculating each measure
explored. Another seminar was held for the department final score, 11 measures were extracted as shown in Table VI.
managers to introduce preliminaries of SKMM model. After Once consensus on the measures obtained, SKMM workgroup
ensuring the commitment of the CEO and department proposed targets for the measures and released them to CEO
managers, an examination of preparation was done based on and department managers in order to confirm them. After some
the subsequent worksheet (Table V). interactions between SKMM workgroup and managers, the
This worksheet was utilized to evaluate if the SAIO can be targets for the measures were identified as depicted in Table VI.
an appropriate nominee for a SKMM establishment. The last activity in the programming phase was
The succeeding worksheet can be seen as an instance for development of a plan for implementation. This plan can be
using it in real world. Scores in the second column can be seen as a base for the execution and incorporation endeavors
assigned by SKMM workgroup after evaluation of that will be happen. Table VII shows the execution or
organization’s current situation. The weight column can be implementation program for the SAIO.
scored after Pairwise Comparisons (Saaty, 1980). As stated by
Niven (2003) a sum of total scores 5.5 will lead to further Execution
attention about weak domains which have marks less than Based on SKMM execution program, top-level SCs were
five. Usually, after “management commitment”, “availability designed for each SKMM perspective by SKMM workgroup,
of organizational strategy” and “availability of resources” are and the initiatives for each CSF and measure were defined.
two domains which have highest priority before SKMM Then the top-level SCs were submitted to all the departments.
establishment. Note that there was a pre-defined strategy In this stage, all departments were obliged to cascade the SCs to
about launching Iranian satellites to capture the space, and all of their sub-departments. Through cascading the top-level
also IT infrastructure was adequately good for the SKMM SCs, any section of departments defined their own SCs in
establishment. cooperation with SKMM workgroup and their department
manager. Top-level SCs for all the SKMM perspectives can be
Programming seen in Tables VIII-XI.
A five-person-workgroup was selected, while the workgroup Note that, Microsoft Excel was selected for SKMM
leader was CKO and the active members were four persons from establishment in the SAIO. Subsequently, in accordance
the KM department. Then a review was conducted about the with defined SCs, the reporting templates were made by
strategy of the SAIO. Afterwards, knowledge functional strategy SKMM workgroup in Microsoft excel format, and were sent
to all departments. For instance, a report template for the
Table V SKMM preparation evaluation worksheet management report has been shown in Figure 6.

Incorporation
Score Total It must be said that before implementing SKMM process in the
Area (out of 10) Weight scores SAIO, there was a systematic approach for process management
in the SAIO based on ISO 9001:2000 Quality Management
Commitment of management 9 0.3 2.7
standard. Hence, key and supportive processes had previously
Availability of organizational strategy 5 0.25 1.25
been defined, and so they were measured and managed
Need for KM strategy establishment 9 0.15 1.35
periodically in each month based on process owners’ reports.
Availability of resources 6 0.15 0.9 So, it was clear to integrate SKMM process with the process
Participant’s support 4 0.1 0.4 management system as a new supportive or managerial process.
Data availability 3 0.05 0.15 In this way, new process map for the SAIO was generated and
Sum 1 6.75 the new process (i.e. SKMM process) was clearly defined and
Source: Adapted from Niven (2003) documented according to ISO 9001 requirements. Then the
quality manual of quality management system was modified
in
Figure 5 SAIO KM strategy map
 Creating knowledge for developing SAIO's products KM strategy

Systemic knowledge dimension For

Increase in external systemic Increase in internal systemic knowledge creation strategy, how we
knowledge knowledge can create systemic knowledge based
on conceptual knowledge?
Conceptual knowledge dimension
Increase in specialized meetings To create a basis for systemic
and seminars knowledge, how we can express
conceptual knowledge and externalize it?

Experiential knowledge dimension

Increase in external Increase in internal To create conceptual knowledge, how
interactions interactions we can create experiential knowledge
based on socialization?

Routine knowledge dimension To

Increase in utilization of Increase in number of Increase in specialized create a basis for experiential
knowledge repository experience years training man-hours knowledge, how we can internalize
routine knowledge in minds?

Table VI Nominated measures for the SAIO

Perspective CSF/objective Measure Criteria/target
Systemic knowledge Increase in internal systemic Number of mega bytes of Incremental trend
knowledge project documents
Number of registered experiences Incremental trend
Increase in external systemic Number of registered patents Incremental trend
knowledge Number of accepted scientific articles Incremental trend
Conceptual knowledge Increase in specialized meetings and Number of specialized seminars Incremental trend
seminars Number of mega bytes of Incremental trend
project meetings records
Experiential knowledge Increase in internal interactions Percentage of working time Greater than or equal to 70 percent
without meetings
Increase in external interactions Social interactions per employee Greater than or equal to four
man-month
Contribution in projects per employee Greater than or equal to two projects
Routine knowledge Increase in specialized Average cascade-training man-hours Incremental trend
training man-hours
Increase in number of experience Average months of employee Greater or equal to 96 months
years experiences
Increase in utilization of Frequencies of utilization of Incremental trend
knowledge repository knowledge repository

order to contain the new process. The next activity in this phase described. In the next movement, some introductory seminars
was to define who is responsible for collecting, inputting and were presented for the other personnel, and in these seminars
analyzing data, generating reports, and communicating the enough guidelines were given to them. In this case, it is stated
results with stakeholders. that the “start time for monitoring SKMM process and data
In this way, in contribution with the department managers, gathering is April 1, 2007.”
responsible persons were selected for gathering, inputting, and
analyzing data; then data gathering templates were sent to them.
Routine function
An example of data gathering template has shown in Figure 7. Data gathering was started from April 1, 2007 in the SAIO
As previously mentioned, the most significant feature of the and the first SKMM report was made at April 30, 2007. CKO
Incorporation stage is communication. In this way, some was responsible for integrating the reports, preparing CEO’s
technical orientation seminars were implemented for the report, and making decisions about rewarding policies for
responsible persons in each department, and objectives, departments with best practices. Data gathering, data
activities, and executing tasks of SKMM were clearly reporting and analysis of results continued regularly within a
Table VII SKMM execution program for the SAIO
Responsible Cooperator
person/ person/
Phase Activities department department Start time End time
Execution Generating top-level SCs and initiatives for each SKMM workgroup Design functions January 1, 2007 January 21, 2007
perspective
Generating sub-level SCs and initiatives for each section Design functions SKMM workgroup January 1, 2007 January 21, 2007
Defining the format of charts and reports and entering SKMM workgroup Design functions January 22, 2007 February 6, 2007
strategy, objectives and measures in software
Incorporation Integrating BSC with the other processes SKMM workgroup – February 7, 2007 February 14, 2007
Assigning responsible persons for collecting, analysis SKMM workgroup – February 15, 2007 February 28, 2007
and reporting
Describing the goals of SKMM to responsible persons SKMM workgroup – March 1, 2006 March 10, 2007
Describing the goals of SKMM to the other personnel SKMM workgroup – March 11, 2007 March 31, 2007
Operation/ Data collection Design functions SKMM workgroup April 1, 2007 September 30, 2007
modification Data analysis and corrective actions Design functions SKMM workgroup April 1, 2007 September 30, 2007
Reporting to related responsible person/department SKMM workgroup Design functions April 1, 2007 September 30, 2007
Overall review to assure alignment of system with KM SKMM workgroup Design functions October 1, 2007 October 14, 2007
strategy

Table VIII Systemic knowledge SC for the SAIO

CSF Measure Criteria Initiatives
Increase in Number of mega bytes Incremental trend All persons and departments must document reports of all phases
internal of project documents of projects based on documentation templates
systemic Number of registered Incremental trend All persons and departments must send their experiences in projects
knowledge experiences to knowledge portals and follow it up to register them
Increase in Number of registered Incremental trend All persons and departments must send their patents to Iranian
external patents defense patent (IDP) and follow it up until registration
systemic Number of accepted Incremental trend All persons and departments must document their case studies in
knowledge scientific articles projects in scientific articles and send them to scientific journals and
conferences and follow it up until acceptance received

Table IX Conceptual knowledge SC for the SAIO

CSF Measure Criteria Initiatives
Increase in Number of specialized Incremental trend All departments must present the outputs of all phases of projects
specialized seminars in specialized seminars after coordination with the CKO
meetings and Number of mega bytes Incremental trend All departments, according to progress of projects and before
seminars of project meetings accomplishment of project phases, must contribute to specialized
records meetings with the project members, after coordination with the CKO
All departments must document the outputs of these sessions in
meeting’s elaborative minutes and send them to the CKO

Table X Experiential knowledge SC for the SAIO

CSF Measure Criteria Initiatives
Increase in Percentage of working Greater than or All departments make a balance for personnel time, qua at least 70
internal time without equal to 70 percent of personnel time not used for meetings
interactions meetings percent
Increase in Greater than or All departments must dispatch their personnel for attending in
external Social interactions per equal to four the professional interaction such as seminars and conferences
interactions employee man-month
Greater than or All persons must contribute to at least two projects at the same
Contribution in projects equal to two time. All departments and persons must be aware of this situation
per employee projects
Table XI Routine knowledge SC for the SAIO
CSF Measure Criteria Initiatives
Increase in Average cascade-training Incremental trend All departments must consider some times for the experienced personnel to
specialized man-hours train the others
training All experienced personnel must fulfill the training ability form and send it
man-hours to the chief knowledge office. Then they must train each other based on
CKO scheduled program
Increase in Average months of Greater or equal All departments must adjust their average months of employee experience
number of employee experiences to 96 months equal or above the pre-defined level. So they must protect the
experience years experienced personnel from lay-off
Increase in Frequencies of utilization Incremental trend All departments must consider some times for employees to refer to
utilization of of knowledge repository the knowledge portal and learn new concepts
knowledge All personnel must use the knowledge portal to learn new concepts and
repository use them in their activities

routine process up to September 31, 2007. For instance, five or more mouse clicks. In this way, it was necessary to
Figure 6 shows a management report after six months of the remove the out of date content, modify the structure of folders
starting time of the routine function phase in the SAIO. After to a more rational arrangement. Also some other changes were
six months from the starting time of the routine function necessary. Examples were adjustment of posting
phase, it was necessary to review the established process permissions, and also developing appropriate taxonomy to
according to the KM strategy. So, we paid some attention to enhance the search engine performance. The SKMM
Figure 6 as an overall picture of the SKMM process workgroup defined an objective to create a novel structure
performance. for the portal with the following attributes:
In order to analyze the results, we can assess the outputs .
Ability to approach objects by maximum four mouse
from a down-top view. In this case, it is so clear that two out clicks.
of three measures of routine knowledge, all the three measures .
Ability to prepare more than one search avenue for
of experiential knowledge, all the two measures of conceptual approaching objects.
knowledge and all the four measures of systemic knowledge, .
Ability to allocate alias or hyperlink for documents in new
approximately had an incremental trend. As a result, it seems “topic-based” subfolders for easier access to the functional
that, approximately all the CSFs had positive effects on the folder which contains the document.
SKMM perspectives and therefore had positive effect on .
Ability to add alias names to appropriate “topic” folders,
knowledge creating strategy. after posting new objects to departmental folders.
Approximately, all the trends show well-defined cause and
According to above discussions, SKMM workgroup decided
effect relationships between the CSFs. But in some cases these
to maintain current CSFs, knowledge strategy map and
relationships had illogical behaviors. For instance, “increase in
measures for the next period.
utilization of knowledge repository” and “increase in internal
systemic knowledge” showed opposite behaviors; also
behaviors of the “increase in utilization of knowledge Conclusion
repository” and “increase in internal systemic knowledge” Considering plenty of papers, books, and web sites about the
were not suitable. KM concerns and influences of KM on organizational
SAIO’ portal started with a collection of searchable best success, it seems that KM is transforming from a
practices, plus a section for field guides, project reports, and managerial tool to an essential weapon for today’s world.
presentations. It was linked to all IT applications and the DMS Importance of KM has resulted in developing some
software of the SAIO. Portal usage statistics indicated a models and approaches for assessment of KM
relatively small number of users. The workgroup understood initiatives and strategies in various organizations. For a
that a corrective action should be done to increase the portal reasonable assessment, it is necessary to have quantitative
usage within the SAIO. Instead of counting on omniscience, the methods.
workgroup directed a web survey to be familiar with employees’ This research tried to develop and represent a method for
need. Also, this survey was to prepare a guide for amendments planning, establishment and control of KM strategies.
needed to the portal. Based on the survey, we realized that the Though SKMM is not proven all around the world, it can
portal had not been well kept. For instance, permission updates prepare a basis for quantitative performance assessment of
had really bad status. In other words, permissions had not been KM strategy and initiatives in organizations. This method
updated for many permission owners after their movements to prepares a variety of tools by which an organization can assess
new place. Besides, lacking an appropriate taxonomy, search its KM strategy outcomes along with the effects of its
terms had not been commonly attached while the search engine particular KM initiatives in accordance with the
was working. In other words, the search engine performance organization’s performance. This method makes directors
was not suitable. and leaders capable of assessing their corporation’s KM
Furthermore, the SKMM workgroup conducted an strategy. It seems that, the model has helpful effects on
examination about the folder structure of portal. The managers’ decisions about selecting appropriate KM
workgroup recognized that almost all of the folders needed initiatives. Although we tried to represent the SKMM
Figure 6 SKMM management report for the SAIO

Creating knowledge for developing SAIO's products and services

 Increase in external systemic Increase in internal systemic
knowledge knowledge
1.5
Number of registered patents 85 Number of registered
1 experiences
75
0.5

Systemic knowledge
65
0 55
Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Inn. 0 0 1 0 0 1 Lea. 61 72 68 75 76 81
20 165
Number of accepted scientific Number of mega bytes of
15 articles 155 project documents
145
10
135
5 125
Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Art. 9 11 11 12 11 13 Lea. 132 137 141 150 152 153

Increase in specialized meetings and seminars

Conceptual knowledge
0.50 15
Number of mega bytes of Number of specialized
0.40 project meeting records seminars
10
0.30
0.20 5
0.10 0
Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Pro. 0.25 0.19 0.21 0.27 0.33 0.33 Sem. 5 6 6 9 10 11

Increase in external interactions Increase in internal

7 2.5 interactions

Experiential knowledge
Social interactions per Contribution in projects 85
5 employee per employee 80 Percentage of working
2 time without meetings
3 75
70
1 1.5 65
Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Soc. 3.11 2.93 3.56 3.91 3.9 4.05 Mul. 1.6 1.75 1.7 1.9 2.05 2.1 Int. 71 72 68.5 73 74.5 75
Criteria 4 4 4 4 4 4 Criteria 2 2 2 2 2 2 Criteria 70 70 70 70 70 70

Increase in number of
Increase in utilization of experience years
knowledge repository Increase in specialized training

Routine knowledge
115 Average months of man-hours
225 Frequencies of utilization of 65
employee experiences
215 knowledge repository 105 Average cascade-training
60 man-hours
205
95 55
195
185 85 50
Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
175 45
Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Exp. 103 102 103 104 105 106 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Fre. 181 195 213 201 200 196 Criteria 96 96 96 96 96 96 Tra. 48 54 55 55 56 56

establishment in an Iranian sub-stream aerospace industry, its in the model by using system dynamic tools (Forrester, 1958).
capabilities make it useful for any other business and industry In this way, different scenarios can be simulated and evaluated
case that needs a KM strategy assessment tool. based on adjusting different variables in the model. System
In spite of model’s capabilities, it really requires extra study dynamics is a good simulation tool which can help to roughly
to verify its analytical and practical status. Apart from model’s predict the future behavior of the system. Usually, system
validity, it needs additional formulation and modification for dynamics begins from a situation that requires a solution, a
utilization at national level. By way of further study, SKMM’s problem that should to be comprehended in a good manner.
advantages and strengths can be illustrated, and then it can be Another important consideration for future research is to
utilized in a lot of business and industry cases. compare KM efficiencies of various departments and
An important research that should be considered is to knowledge committees. This comparison can be done by
evaluate cause and effect relationships between the variables using an efficiency evaluation method like DEA (Charnes
Figure 7 A sample data collection template for the SAIO

Measure name: Number of registered experiences

Measure definition: Number of experiences in projects that send to knowledge portal and registered by
knowledge management office after peer reviewing and accepting by the specialized expert team
Responsible person/department: Design function A Measurement period: each month
Related perspective: Systemic knowledge perspective Related CSF: Increase in internal systemic knowledge
No. Measurement Measured Result
Target/criteria Improvement action needed
period value Ok Nok
1 April Incremental trend 14 -- --
2 May Greater than 14 16
3 June Greater than 16 15 Go to consideration (hint 1)
4 July Greater than 16 18
5 August Greater than 18 19
6 September Greater than 19 21

Consideration
Hint 1: Section 1 of the design function A received
Graphical representation

21 a warning because of its weak performance in

19 sending and registering new experiences in
17 knowledge portal
15
13
 Number of registered
experiences
et al., 1978). DEA is a review of the tools Chou, S. (2005), http://hdl.handle.net/201
Linear Programming tool available to measure and “Knowledge creation: 4/38041
Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Hong-bing, L. and Lei,
by which decision makers manage intangible absorptive capacity,
can assess relativeLea. 14 16 15 18 19 European
resources”, 21 organizational L. (2007), “DEA-based
efficiencies of various Management Journal, Vol. mechanisms, and project
decision-making units in a 17 No. 4, pp. 391-402. knowledge knowledge management
particular set of members. Bose, R. (2004), storage/retrieval performance
One domain for further “Knowledge management capabilities”, Journal of evaluation”, International
research is to evaluate metrics”, Industrial Information Science, Vol. Conference on Management
customers’ Management & Data 31 No. 6, pp. 453-65. Science and Engineering
impact on SKMM. Another Systems, Vol. 104 No. CMA (1999), Focus SAIO (ICMSE 2007), Harbin,
area can be examining the 6, pp. 457-68. Draft: Measuring Knowledge August 20-22, pp. 1561-
impact of organizational Charnes, A., Cooper, Assets, 6.
extent on SKMM W.W. and Rhodes, E. Canadian Management Jafari, M., Akhavan, P.
endeavors. A strategic (1978), “Measuring the Accountants, Mississauga, and Nouraniour, E.
alignment between SKMM efficiency of decision April 16. Fairchild, A. (2009),
and organizational strategy making units”, European (2002), “Knowledge “Developing an
seems a good issue for Journal of Operational management metrics via a architecture model for
future studies. Research, Vol. 2, pp. 429- balanced scorecard enterprise knowledge: an
The impacts of the 44. Chen, R., Liu, P. methodology”, Proceedings empirical study based on
establishment of SKMM and Tang, S. (2008), of the 35th Annual Hawaii the Zachman framework
on “An evaluation method International Conference on in Iran”, Management
organizational for enterprise knowledge System Sciences Decision, Vol. 47 No. 5,
performance can be management performance (HICSS’02), pp. 730-59.
addressed as a subject for based on linguistic Big Island, Jafari, M., Akhavan, P.
further research. variable”, paper Hawaii, Vol. and Rezaeenour, J.
presented at 8, p. 243. (2007a), “An
International Seminar Forrester, J.W. (1958), application of factor
R on Business and “Industrial dynamics – a analysis for change
e Information major breakthrough for resolution: the
f Management, Wuhan, decision makers”, Har preliminaries of
e December 19. vard Business Review, knowledge management
r Choo, C.W. and Bontis, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 37- establishment”, The
N. (2002), The Strategic 66. International Journal of
e
Management Groene, O., Brandt, E., Knowledge, Culture &
n of Intellectual Capital and Schmidt, W. and Moeller, Change Management,
c Organizational Knowledge, J. (2009), Vol. 7 No. 5, pp. 89-
e Oxford “The balanced scorecard 102.
s U of acute settings:
n development process
Akhavan, P., Jafari, M. and i definition of 20 strategic
Fathian, M. (2006), v objectives and
“Critical success factors of e implementation”,
knowledge management r International Journal for
systems: a multi case s Quality in Health Care,
analysis”, European Business i Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 259-
Review, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. t 71.
97-113. Bloodgood, J.M. y Hildreth, P.M. and
and Salisbury, W.D.
Kimble, C. (2002), “The
(2001), “Understanding
P duality of
the influence of
r knowledge”,
organizational change
e Information
strategies on
s Research, Vol.
information technology s 8 No. 1.
and knowledge , Holm, J. (2005), Effective
management strategies”, Techniques for Capturing,
Decision Support System, Creating and Management
Vol. 31, pp. 55-69. O
x Knowledge at NASA,
Bontis, N., Dragonetti,
f NASA Knowledge
N.C., Jacobsen, K. and
o Management Team, Jet
Roos, G.
r Propulsion Laboratory,
(1999), “The
d NASA, Pasadena, CA,
knowledge toolbox: a
. available at:
Jafari, M., Akhavan, P., Fesharaki, M.N. and Fathian, M. Petty, R. and Guthrie, J. (2000), “Intellectual capital
(2007b), “Iran aerospace industries’ KM approach based on literature review: measurement, reporting and
a comparative study: a benchmarking on successful management”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 1 Nos 2/3,
practices”, Aircraft Engineering & Aerospace Technology, pp. 155-76.
Vol. 79 No. 1, pp. 69-78. Polanyi, M. (1966), The Tacit Dimension, Routledge & Kegan
Jain, P. (2009), “Knowledge management for 21st century Paul, London.
information professionals”, Jour nal of Ponzi, L.J. and Koenig, M. (2002), “Knowledge management:
Knowledge Management Practice, Vol. 10 No. 2. another management fad?”, Information Research, Vol. 8
Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. (1992), “The balanced No. 1.
scorecard – measures that drive performance”, Har vard Quintas, P., Lefrere, P. and Jones, G. (1997), “Knowledge
Business Review, Vol. 70 No. 1, pp. 71-9. management: a strategic agenda”, Long Range Planning,
Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. (1996), “Using the balanced Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 385-91.
scorecard as a strategic management system”, Harvard Rockart, J.F. (1979), “Chief executives define their own data
Business Review, Vol. 74 No. 1, pp. 75-85. needs”, Har vard Business Review, March/April, pp. 81-93.
Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. (1997), “Why does business Roos, J., Roos, G., Dragonetti, N. and Edvinsson, L. (1998),
need a balanced scorecard”, Journal of Cost Management, Intellectual Capital: Navigating in the New Business
Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 5-10. Landscape, New York University Press, New York, NY.
Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. (2001), The Strategy-focused Saaty, T.L. (1980), The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-
Organization, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Hill, New York,
Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. (2004), Strategy Maps: NY.
Converting Intangible Assets into Tangible Outcomes, Harvard Salterio, S. and Webb, A. (2003), “The balanced scorecard”,
Business School Press, Boston, MA. CA Magazine, August, pp. 39-41.
Laycock, M. (2005), “Collaborating to compete: achieving Smits, M. and de Moor, A. (2004), “Effective knowledge
effective knowledge sharing in organizations”, The Learning management in knowledge-intensive organizations”,
Organization, Vol. 12 No. 6, pp. 523-38. Proceedings of Organizational Knowledge, Learning and
Lillrank, P. (2002), “The quality of information”, Capabilities, Innsbruck, April.
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Song, J.H. (2008), “The key to organizational performance
Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 691-703. improvement: a perspective of organizational knowledge
Lin, C.-Y. and Kuo, T.-H. (2007), “The mediate effect of creation”, Performance Improvement Quarterly, Vol. 21 No. 2,
learning and knowledge on organizational performance”, pp. 87-102.
Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 107 No. 7, Steele, J. (2001), “Transforming the balanced scorecard into
pp. 1066-83. your strategy execution system”, Manage, Vol. 53 No. 1,
Mertins, K., Heisig, P. and Vorbeck, J. (2003), Knowledge pp. 22-4.
Management: Concepts and Best Practices, Springer, Berlin. Sveiby, K.E. (2001), Frequently Asked Questions, Sveiby
Mitri, M. (2003), “Applying tacit knowledge management
Knowledge Associates, Brisbane, available at: www.sveiby.
techniques for performance assessment”, Computers &
com.au/faq.html
Education, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 173-89. Sveiby, K.E. (2001-2005), “Methods for measuring intangible
Mountain State Group (2005), Balanced Scorecards for Small
assets”, available at: www.sveiby.com/ar ticles/intan gible
Rural Hospital: Concept Overview & Implementation Guidance,
methods.html ( accesed January 2001, updated April 2001,
United States Department of Health and Human Services,
May 2002, October 2002, 2005).
Washington, DC, pp. 1-61.
Tat, L.W. and Hase, S. (2007), “Knowledge management in
Niven, P.R. (2003), Balanced Scorecard Step-by-step for
the Malaysian aerospace industry”, Journal of Knowledge
Government and Nonprofit Agencies, Wiley, New York, NY.
Management, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 143-51.
Nonaka, I. (1991), “The knowledge-creating company”,
Teece, D.J. (1998), “Research directions for knowledge
Har vard Business Review, Reprint 91608, November/
management”, California Management Review, Vol. 40 No.
December.
3, pp. 89-292.
Nonaka, I. and Konno, N. (1998), “The concept of ‘Ba’:
Wiig, K.M. (1997), “Integrating intellectual capital and
building a foundation for knowledge creation”, California
Management Review, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 40-54. knowledge management”, Long Range Planning, Vol.
Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995), The Knowledge-creating 30
Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of No. 3, pp. 399-405.
Innovation, Oxford University Press, New York, NY. Wilson, T.D. (2002), “The nonsense of ‘knowledge
Nonaka, I., Peltokorpi, V. and Tomae, H. (2005), “Strategic management’”, Information Research, Vol. 8 No. 1.
knowledge creation: the case of Hamamatsu photonics”,
International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 30 Further reading
Nos 3/4, p. 248.
McInerney, C. (2002), “Hot topics: knowledge management
Nonaka, I., Toyama, R. and Konno, N. (2000), “SECI, Ba
– a practice still defining itself ”, Bulletin of the American
and leadership: a unified model of dynamic knowledge
Society for Information Science, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 14-15.
creation”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 5-34.

Corresponding author
Jalal Rezaeenour can be contacted at: [email protected]
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints