AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIAL AND MANAGEMENT SCIENCES

ISSN Print: 2156-1540, ISSN Online: 2151-1559, doi:10.5251/ajsms.2011.2.1.188.195

2011, ScienceHu, http://www.scihub.org/AJSMS

Managers perception of potential impact of knowledge management in

the workplace: Case study
Professor Khalid Alrawi and Walid Alrawi
American University in the Emirates, Alkhawarizmi International College,
College of Business Administration, United Arab Emirates
ABSTRACT
This paper is an exploratory research that reviews how organization managers perceive
knowledge management (KM), and practice across all levels of their firms. The paper posits that
KM consists of enablers such as top management commitment and knowledge structure that are
critical to the success of a knowledge-based organization. The study was stimulated firstly, the
recognition of shifting businesses from production-based to a knowledge-based economy,
secondly the emergence of the needs for knowledge managers, as well as learning organization.
The paper also addresses all top management leaders (levels of decision making) in the study.
The study is conducted in Abu Dhabi, Al-ain, United Arab Emirates (UAE), and the study
represents all firms according to The Chamber of Commerce Directory. Based on the sample
of 112 firms, finding reveal that managers perception in these firms was a key barrier for
achieving success and positive performance. Findings reveal that although business growth and
a large market size were seen to motivate firms locally, perceiveness of the potential KM
effectiveness to increase efficiency of the organization was lagging behind, and therefore
understanding KM was a barrier.
Keywords: Knowledge Management, knowledge Creation, Managers' Perceptions, Managers
Commitments, Decision Making.
INTRODUCTION
Knowledge management is a structured process that
enables knowledge to be created, stored, distributed,
and applied to decision making (Alavi and Leidner,
2001). The experience from industries has identified
the necessary factors that are required to ensure
success of KM approach, and also to increase the
effectiveness of an organization. Knowledge
management involves human resources, organization
policy and culture, information technology, tools and
methods that support and enable it (Nissen, 2002). In
this respect KM typically follows different steps,
create, capture and share the knowledge. KM aims to
discover research and study knowledge. Therefore,
KM system is a tool aimed to support knowledge
sharing, the creation, capture organization and
dissemination of data, information and knowledge
within and across the departments or communities of
practice with similar interests and needs (Chang,
et.al, 2005).
One promising tool for knowledge development and
management is the notion of learning object
repositories, a repository for information and
knowledge. Like a library, the repositories' purposes
are to maintain a collection to meet the growing

needs and demands for informational, research or

recreational needs of its users (Kanuka, and
Garrison, 2007). To make a KM work efficiently and
effectively it must be a local and personalized. The
question is what infrastructure is required to support
the organizations' management that also could be
grown to support broader institutional needs?
In an organization KM duties comprises of
organizing, transferring, locating and ensuring the
usage of information and expertise within the
organization. The enablers support for such a
process is the culture of the organization, leadership
perception, the technology used and measurement of
achievement.
Within
such
understanding
management use the processing capabilities to take
effective action to achieve the firms' goals (Oliver and
Kandadi, 2006).
This paper investigates managers' perception about
KM effects within their organizations' working
environment, their beliefs is regarded as a major
factor that could encourage the practice of KM. Such
belief influences knowledge creation through
opportunities, motivation, and capability for
knowledge combination in their organization.
Therefore this paper implies that further theoretical

Am. J. Soc. Mgmt. Sci., 2011, 2(1): 188-195

flows are enhanced or inhibited not only by accepted

procedures and norms but also may be enabled or
constrained by systems or information technology as
far as KM may involve both technical and human
entities behave on each other dependently.

research be conducted on the relationship between

the various objectives for KM benefits to enhance this
exploratory research. Now there is recognition that
business is a knowledge-rich activity and that KM in
business is a priority. Firms have recently recognized
the potential for KM to improve the quality of
achievement. An understanding of KM is now
important for any business employer especially for
those interested in work based learning for firms and
its management in the UAE.

Organizational Knowledge and End Results: The

three entities mentioned in the introduction section
(i.e., opportunities, motivation, and capabilities), have
a recursive relationship. Changes in one can enable
or inhibit changes in the other (King and Marks,
2008). In fact these elements represent a conceptual
framework regarding managers' perception, and use
of information technology used in their organizations
as a culture in the workplace, and one may think
about the creation, access, distribution and the
application of knowledge within the organization.
Figure (1) illustrates the relationships among the
three variables mentioned above.

The researcher believes that the findings will help to

shed valuable insights for business support
organizations concerning managers' perceptions
towards KM, and the necessities to change such
perceptions.
The conceptual framework for this study is based on
direct interview where a questionnaires addressed
those managers, and the observation that information

Organization
Performance

Knowledge
Sharing
Opportunities

Capabilities

Motivations

Fig 1: Effects of Knowledge Sharing Influence

Figure (1) permits and explain, the interchange

relationships between variables affecting knowledge
sharing and the organization performance. These

three variables should be perceived by managers as

a way in which knowledge may affect organizational
performance. If this is the case in the organization,

189

Am. J. Soc. Mgmt. Sci., 2011, 2(1): 188-195

organization from its competitors in that particular

industry or sector. The role of manager to play in
such situation could be achieved through the
connection between firm's competitive situation and a
KM strategy to help their firm's maintaining or reestablish its competitive advantage. As firms differ
from each other in terms of product, industry, or
sector, therefore, management will find its own
unique link between knowledge and strategy (Kim
and Street, 2004). Then some organization will
concentrate on their relationship with their customers
by increasing customer satisfaction and their needs
and wants. However, other organization may develop
new ideas, invent innovation and get them to market
quickly, or may focus on themselves and their
internal logistical capacity and capabilities. Such
discipline
is
reflected
in
Figure
(2).

such situation interprets by the existence of the

positive relationship between knowledge sharing and
firms' performance (Van, 2005). In an industrial firm,
positive relationship means the existence of
collaboration and knowledge sharing between
departments
and
employees
in
terms
of
manufacturing,
quality
and
research
and
development, and this will lead to the increasing in
productivity and performance. Then manager's
contribution is vital. Managers should be aware that
sharing knowledge in a meaningful manner requires
a well balanced merge of technology with a firms'
culture that create a climate or an environment
enhancing collaboration. Advanced knowledge gives
an organization a competitive advantage. It is a
specific knowledge that gives specific organization a
competitive edge (Bechky, 2003). With the core
knowledge, the management differentiates its

Operational
Activities

Product
Differentiation

Output
Product +
Service

Firm

Clients

Customer
Fig 2: Organization Focus for Value

Satisfaction Trust between these pillars is an

important element which affects knowledge in the
organization's working environment. The result is
improvement in transferring of information, the
communication networking.

relationship to information (King, 2006). The

recognition of interacting through distinguishing
between information data arranged to meaningful
pattern and knowledge which has been regarded as
an element should be true, and reliable. Such
practicing of knowledge may enabling managers of
setting a method or approach or a strategy, and

Managers
therefore,
should
recognize
that
understanding knowledge requires some grasp of its

190

Am. J. Soc. Mgmt. Sci., 2011, 2(1): 188-195

potentially useful knowledge and to make it available

to those who can use it at a time and place that is
appropriate for them to achieve maximum usage and
maximal impact on organizational performance (King,
2007). Thus, the true value is created by fostering
innovation in the organization. In this respect the
organization must consider knowledge as strategic
assets, and these organizations should capitalize on
existing organizational knowledge to improve and
build up an intellectual assets base as an attempt to
gain a competitive advantage.

enabling their firms embodied principles and moral

(Kankanhalli et.al.,2003). Management at the end is
regarded as an enabler's support to the KM process,
through the quality of leadership, recognition of
cultural effect, the suitable technology used and
measurement of achievement or performance. For
effective ongoing knowledge creation executives
should understand that KM is a way of organizing
information, transferring information, experience, and
personal skills. (Keulartz, and Schermer, 2004).
The implications for Work Based Learning:
Knowledge
management
involves
many
organizational activities that are aimed at improving
knowledge-related practices, organizational behavior
and performance.

Based on general acceptance between businessmen,

the researcher believes that the success of KM
strategies is to a large extent determined by the
support from top and middle-level management (Rus
and Lindvall, (2002). Leadership is essential to
stimulate staff motivation to access the various
sources of knowledge and to encourage employees
to share their tacit knowledge (Kuo and Chu, 2004).
Managers use the information technology to build the
infrastructure that is required to support the core
activities of storing and distributing knowledge. With
the spread of technology and efficient communication
network management has different choices and
alternatives to enhance information technology
support to KM. The aim of this information technology
is sharing, capturing, leveraging for further learning
and innovation among employees. Figure (3),
reflecting these thoughts.

Knowledge management is based on the premise

that just as human beings are unable to draw on the
full potential of their brains; organizations are
generally not able to fully utilize the knowledge
possessed by individual employees as well as that
which exists collectively within the organization
(Lamb and Kling, 2003). Through KM, organizational
knowledge may be managed to create new
knowledge. The knew knowledge is created
knowledge sharing between employees within the
environment of the organization. Therefore innovation
and knowledge are linked to knowledge sharing.
Through KM, organizations seek to acquire or create

Extranet

Internet

Decision Support System

Intranet
Data Warehouse

KM Technologies

Project Management
Fig 3: Variables Affecting Knowledge Management

The practices of these variables depend on mangers

perceptions and the stage of organizational
investment in ad hoc KM software that facilitates
organizational knowledge. Training programme may
be required to enhance development of standards
and best practices of knowledge and management
efficiency. Therefore based on KM progress

mentioned above, it can be fairly said that KM is not a

technology; in contrast, technology is fundamental to
KM progress (Ali and Ahmad, 2006). The application
of such thought depends mainly on the culture of the
organization in absorbing new ideas and experiences
both from within and outside the organization to
develop a process to achieve success (Thiessen and

191

Am. J. Soc. Mgmt. Sci., 2011, 2(1): 188-195

Looker, 2007). Therefore, some organizations may

concentrate on their leadership with customer, other
organizations may focus on their products and
services, and other group may focus on their

organizational processes and the internal structure.

Figure (4); reflects such focuses by organizations for
a better use of knowledge.

Improving Product &

Service

Organization's
Operations

Knowledge
Management

Customer Satisfaction

Fig 4: Organizational Focuses on Knowledge Values

(Wathen and Burkell, 2002). The environment forces

such as competitive advantage by managing
knowledge well, or the requirement of the
organization to distribute its knowledge among its
organizational hierarchy may compel-the organization
to initiate a knowledge management programme in a
way that creates an environment supporting
collaboration. Therefore managers' tasks are to
ensure sharing information in a collaborative form
and aware of the information technology resources
are available (Papoutsakis, 2006).

In general in order to build a KM strategy

management may use the SWOT analysis approach
(Strength, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats)
to identify the strategic gap in their organization's
knowledge. Such analysis enables the organization
to identify where it has the knowledge which it can
exploit and, where it can exploit in the above three
possibilities. Thus, organizational knowledge creation
processes are influenced by social phenomenon.
These are the three elements of knowledge capital
which represent and comprise the organization's
stock of intangible assets (Saint-Onge, 1998).

The level of corporation and trust between

management and employees in turn provides the
basis for establishing employees' loyalty to their
firms. The convergence of perspectives required to
have an effective partnership will be best achieved
through on-going knowledge sharing and strategic
discussion between the organization and employees
(Menon and Pfeffer, 2003).

According to Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998), sharing

norms and values enable a group of people to
exchange their knowledge. Such norms and values
include a response to diversity, openness to criticism,
and a tolerance of failure which facilitate group think,
that shows a high level of knowledge creation.
Therefore, KM is a social process, and more than
data management. In the business world today, an
organization's competitive edge almost wholly
depends on how well it can manage and deploy its
corporate assets, either tangible or intangible

Research Approach: The research's design adopted

for this study is exploratory in nature to obtain
preliminary insights into the managers' behavior

192

Am. J. Soc. Mgmt. Sci., 2011, 2(1): 188-195

The researcher's conclusion is based on the fact that

managers in the sample have no perception of the
collective knowledge; a social constructionist view of
knowledge considers that all individuals are
constantly interacting with other individuals in an
organization, whether this organization is regarded as
an individual practice, primary business organization
or the whole of the industry. This concept is important
and underestimated by managers in the sample since
it is through this social process that new knowledge is
created and, existing knowledge is applied to the
unique situations that are faced by both individuals
and the organizations of which they are an integral
part (Akgun, et.al, 2003).

toward KM among industrial firms in UAE. A

questionnaire survey was adopted as the principle
method for data collection, which suited the financial
and time constraints of the research project. The
findings provide the opportunity for all firms to
participate. Abu Dhabi Directory of durable products
and services are used as the sampling frame for the
study and in total (112) manufacturing firms was
listed. Total confidentiality was guaranteed for all
respondents and this was clearly highlighted in the
covering letter. In total, the questionnaires were
eventually used for data analysis represented a (76)
percent response rate which was perceived to be
adequate for the exploratory nature of research
investigation.

The researcher addressed the managers in the

sample and cited various objectives for KM efforts.
The results were disappointing; however it was
consistent with the gloomy understanding of
knowledge by those managers (see Appendix 1).
These objectives are written in order of importance
according to the researcher's point of view. Table (1)
shows the results.

Findings and Results: In current and emerging

business contexts our understanding of what creates
competitive value for organizations has changed
radically. In many cases the long-term prosperity of
an organization now depends to a large extent on its
KM capabilities. KM is the ability to develop,
maintain, leverage and renew this type of intangible
assets (Saint-Onge, 1998). Therefore, managers are
able to manage the knowledge for the benefit of their
firms. In the knowledge economy, the quality of
relationship between KM and performance will
determine the extent to which value is added to the
organization.

Table 1: Survey Results

The researcher addresses the following question to

the managers in the sample: What is KM?
The majority of the respondents (85%) defined KM as
the accumulation of personal experience within his
work. To those managers then KM is what they learn
from their work, in fact they mentioned to what is
known '' Tacit Knowledge''. This knowledge then may
store in the brain of a worker, but it may be possible
to convert certain aspects of it into '' Explicit
Knowledge''-what is stored in a variety of formats,
such as on the shelves of libraries and in electronic
data. The researcher believes that as far as those
respondents have traditional understanding of what
knowledge is, he is in doubt that those managers
have the capabilities and familiarity to possible
converse their aspects into explicit knowledge. New
explicit knowledge can be created from research and
from the conversion of tacit into explicit knowledge.
However, new tacit knowledge is developed by the
daily experiences of individuals and by the
internalization of explicit knowledge (King and Lekse,
2006).

Knowledge Management
Objectives

Percentage %

10

3,4,5,6

40

7,8

30

9,10

10

11 (Others)

10

From the above table, managers' perceptions

towards KM are not encouraging. No one of those
managers in the sample mentions that KM main
objectives is to enhance internal collaboration among
employees, whereas, the effective KM sharing is
fostering innovation by encouraging the free inflow of
ideas and improving the decision making process.
Only (10%) of the respondents mention that part of
KM objectives is to capture and share best practice.
The researcher believes that the first two objectives
listed in the Appendix should get the high percentage
and preferences or perceptions among managers.
The basis for such belief is that KM programme
enhance employees retention rates by recognizing
the value of the employees' knowledge, and reducing
costs by eliminating redundant or unnecessary
processes.

193

Am. J. Soc. Mgmt. Sci., 2011, 2(1): 188-195

an organizational structure that allows development

of trust across employees, and achievement of
success. If those managers realize the potential of
KM, then they will have to meet the challenge.
Management should not underestimate the unique
characteristic of knowledge which is being one of the
few assets that grows almost exponentially when
shared. Managers should also be aware that
knowledge in a meaningful manner requires a well
balanced merge of technology with the organizations'
culture, in away that creates an environment
supporting collaboration between employees and
departments.

A creative approach to KM can be resulted in an

improved efficiency, higher productivity and
increased revenues practically by business function.
Thirty percent of the respondents mentioned that
enhancing web site and transactional business
process is the objectives of the KM efforts. The
researcher found that those managers are Business
Administration graduates and Head of Marketing
Depts. and, therefore they express their perceptions
from business point of view. However this objective
importance is less than other objectives for KM such
as enhancing internal collaboration or capturing and
sharing best practices. Ten percent mentioned that
KM objectives are enhancing supply chain
management. Mangers who express this attitude are
Marketing and Business Law certificates holders.
Another (10 %) mentioned many different objectives
such as improving customer services, streamlining
response time, and getting the products and services
to market faster. The researcher believes that firms'
activities related to these KM objectives mentioned in
Appendix(1), which addressed the managers in the
sample, represent the consistency between
organization tasks and management tasks which
include: optimizing intellectual capital by producing
KM solutions such as codification strategies and
knowledge bases , knowledge sharing through the
organization internal communication network facilitate
a firm corporate knowledge culture, improving
leaders' knowledge and, improving efficiency gains in
terms of return of investment. Due to the gloomy
environment concerning KM objectives, the
researcher did not ask if these organizations
measured the impact of KM on their performance, for
example in terms of time reduction or gaining
revenues. However it is not the intent of the paper to
measure the impact of the organization performance.

Knowledge Management is an organizational as well

as a social process, and not only a data management
process. One approach to facilitating knowledge
creation is through management encouragement of
knowledge dispersion in their organization through
communication improvements.
The focus of KM is to connecting employees,
processes and technology for the sake of flourishing
corporate knowledge. Managers should play a crucial
role in making such connection possible. As there are
immense potential of KM's contribution to
advancement, managers should identify the critical
success factors required for it. This approach include
imaginative
leadership
and
management,
development of the firms' organizational structure,
trust between management and employees, and
investment in the suitable information technology
infrastructure. These factors are important, since
without the necessary underpinning conditions, there
is little likelihood for KM's concept to flourish.
The researcher found that sharing and distributing
knowledge among employees to improve their
capabilities is one of the main reasons for KM
integration in the organization through people and
technology. The study highlights that KM integration
is very important for managers to maintain their
competitive edge and neglected by firms in the study.
With a conceptual development, this paper explains
the positive role of KM managers on knowledge
creation in the organization and enhancement of trust
between organization and its employees.

CONCLUSIONS
In this paper the researcher highlights the managers'
perception of KM and the importance of integration
within the organizations to maintain possible
competitive advantage in the UAE. In its recent
introduction to business industries, firms derived
many benefits from applying KM practices in their
operations. Managers in the UAE have to practice a
structured approach to manage knowledge so that
can be immense benefits to every one concerned;
their firms, their customers, their workers, and their
organizations. The environmental forces compel firms
to take KM initiatives. Such initiatives include
imaginative leadership, investment in the essential
information technology infrastructure, development of

Limitation of the Study: As all research has

limitations, first this study only views firms as
information processing system, which treats a
particular aspect of the organization in this paper.
Second, due to the complex concept of knowledge
there are different aspect of knowledge and its
application, thus further study is needed.

194

Am. J. Soc. Mgmt. Sci., 2011, 2(1): 188-195

Mining Approach, Decision Support System, Vol. 37,

pp.215-228.

REFERENCES
Ali, H., and Ahmad, N.,(2006), Knowledge Management in
Malaysian Banks, A New Paradigm, Journal of
Knowledge Management Practices, Vol.7, No.3, pp.113.

Kankanhalli, A., Tanudidjaja, F., Sutanto, J., and Tan, Y.,

(2003), the Role of IT in Successful Knowledge
Management Initiatives, Communications of the ACM,
Vol.46, No.9, pp.69-74.

Akgun, E., Lynn, S., and Byrne, C., (2003), Organizational

Learning: A Socio-cognitive Framework, Human
Relations, Vol. 56, pp. 839-868.

Lamb, R., and Kling, R.,(2003), Reconceptualizing Users

as Social Actors in Information Systems Research,
MIS Quarterly, Vol.27, No.2, pp.197-235.

Alavi, M., and Leidner, E.,(2001), Knowledge Management

and Knowledge Management Systems, Conceptual
Foundations and Research Issues, MIS Quarterly,
Vol.25, No. 1, pp. 107-136.

Menon, T., and Pfeffer, J., (2003), Valuing Internal vs.

External Knowledge Explaining the Preference for
Outsiders, Management Science, Vol.49, No. 4, p 497.
Nissen, E., (2002), An Extended Model of Knowledge-flow
Dynamic, Communications of the Association for
Information Systems, Vol. 8, pp.251-266.

Bechky, A., (2003), Sharing Meaning Across Occupational

Communities: The Transformation of Understanding
on a Production Floor, Organization Science, A
Journal of the Institute of Management Sciences,
Vol.14, pp. 312-330.

Nahapiet, J., and Ghoshal, S.,(1998), Social Capital,

Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage,
Academy of Management Review, Vol.23, No. 2, pp.
242-266.

Chang, K., Lee, S., and Won, I,(2005), Measuring

Knowledge Management Performance, Information
Management, Vol.42, No. 3, pp.469-482.

Oliver, S., and Kandadi, R., (2006), How to Develop

Knowledge Culture in Organization? A Multiple Case
Study of Large Distributed Organizations, Journal of
Knowledge Management, Vol. 10, No.4, pp. 6-24.

King, W., and Marks, P., (2008), Motivating Knowledge

Sharing Through a Knowledge Management System,
The International Journal of Management Science,
Vol.36, pp. 131-146.

Papoutsakis, H,(2006), Linking Knowledge Management

and Information technology to Business Performance:
A Literature Review and A Proposed Model, Journal of
Knowledge Management Practices, Vol. 7, No.1, pp. 114.

King, W., (2007), Knowledge Management: A Systems

Perspective, International Journal of Business
Systems and Research, Vol. 1, No.1 p10.
King,W.,(2006), The Critical Role of Information Processing
in Creating An Effective Knowledge Organization,
Journal of Database Management, vol.17, No.1, pp0115.

Rus, I., and Lindvall, M., (2002), Knowledge Management

in Software Engineering, IEEE Software, Vol. 19, No.3,
pp. 26-38.

King, W., and Lekse, W., (2006), Deriving Managerial

Benefit Form Knowledge Search: A Paradigm Shift?
Information and Management, Vol.43, No. 7, pp.874883.

Saint-Onge, H,(1998), How Knowledge Management Adds

Critical Value To Distribution Channel Management,
Journal of Systematic Knowledge Management, Vol. 1,
No.1, p6.

Keulartz, J., and Schermer, M.,(2004), Ethics in

Technological Culture: A Programmatic Proposal for A
Pragmatist Approach, Science Technology Human
values, Vol.29, No. 1, pp.3-29.

Thiessen, V., and Looker, E., (2007), Digital Divides and

Capital Conversion: The Optimal Use of Information
and Communication Technology for Youth Reading
Achievement, Information Communication and Society,
Vol. 10, No. 2, pp.159-180.

Kanuka, D, and Garrison, D., (2007), Knowledge

Management
and
E-learning,
Available
at
http://Commons.ucalgary.ca.

Van, H., (2005), Running in Packs To Develop Knowledge

intensive Technologies, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 29, No. 2,
pp. 365-378.

Kuo, Y., and Chu, T.,(2004), An Investigation of Effortaccuracy Trade-off and The Impact of Self-efficacy on
Web Searching Behavior, Decision Support System,
Vol. 37, No. 3, pp. 331.
Kim,

Wathen, N., and Burkell, J.,(2002), Believe It or Not:

Factors Influencing Credibility on The Web, Journal of
The American Society for Information Science and
Technology,
Vol.53,
No.
2,
p
134.

Y., and Street, N., (2004), An Intelligent

recommendation System for Customer Targeting: Data

195