Cover Image

Not for Sale



View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 24


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 23
24 CHAPTER FIVE SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS OF QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS FOR QUESTIONS 612 REGARDING CULTURAL RECEPTIVITY, AUTHORITY, AND RESPONSIBILITIES CULTURAL RECEPTIVITY necessarily readily available or known. This reinforces the results shown in Figure 4. Overall, the receptivity can be char- Even a casual review of the literature regarding KM reveals that acterized as neutral to weak positive and, as evidenced by the the overall cultural receptivity to sharing knowledge is a key results for Question 7, management expectation for using insti- factor in managing knowledge processes. Question 6 asked the tutional memory is there; however, overall there is not a strong STAs to rank their organization's cultural receptivity based on enough emphasis to require implementing a formal KM pro- such factors as: gram to ensure that the business process is in place. Is knowledge sharing more common than knowledge hoarding? WHO EXERCISES OVERALL AUTHORITY FOR Are KM practices encouraged and supported by man- KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES? agement? Does staff enter into KM activities willingly? Question 8 sought to determine who in the organization has Are practices encouraged, including documenting work, authority over KM practices. The following list derived from sharing lessons learned in after-action sessions, partici- the responses of 18 STAs shows that in most cases overall pating in discussions about what went right or wrong, authority in not specifically designated. A few STAs reported saving project documentation for future reference, authority residing at the top executive levels. Also, the limited building effective information repositories, or accessing number of STAs responding to this question may indicate that information from external sources? the responder did not know and chose not to guess. Note that Table F3 in Appendix F gives complete comments. Table F1 in Appendix F gives the results for each STA. Figure 4 summarizes the results. Motor Vehicle Division program management Shared by library and agency-wide records management As Figure 4 shows, the combination of "largely negative" No one/none assigned and "neutral" roughly balance that of "largely receptive" and Director of design "highly receptive." One can conclude that while there is not Executive director outright opposition, neither is there a strong push for better Two division directors KM implementation. From this, it is inferred that management KM practices are accomplished by each office area attention can probably be characterized as "passively posi- Director and division heads tive." In other words, there does not appear to be aggressive or No individual or unit--everyone assertive leadership from the executive level, but neither is Director, senior staff, plus shared responsibility of district there pervasive or persistent negativity. deputy directors This is a sometimes in our organization, depending on MANAGEMENT EXPECTATION THAT the project and culture of the unit EMPLOYEES CONSULT PRIOR Does not reside with any one person or even just one ORGANIZATIONAL EXPERIENCE AS office, maybe the General Services Division EVIDENCED IN DOCUMENTS, DATABASES, Senior leaders KNOWLEDGEABLE PEOPLE, KM officer. AND OTHER RESOURCES Question 7 went beyond cultural receptivity to probe manage- WHO EXERCISES STRONGEST LEADERSHIP ment attitudes regarding application of institutional memory to OVER KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES? current work. It is interesting that of the 19 STAs responding to this question, all 19 answered "yes." Comments as docu- Question 9 was a follow-up to Question 8. It sought to deter- mented in Table F3 in Appendix F articulated that whereas mine who exercises leadership, as opposed to who actually there is an expectation, the mechanisms for doing so are not has authority. Again, the list shows a wide variety of responses