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
