Demystifying the eighth lean waste: a knowledge waste scale

Abstract

PurposeSince few studies have explored and advanced on the development of measures of knowledge waste, the purpose of this paper is to develop and validate a scale for measuring the waste of knowledge.Design/methodology/approachA research was carried out in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) divided into five distinct stages, three qualitative and two quantitative. For the quantitative steps, a sample of 223 responses was obtained for the exploratory part and another sample of 614 responses for the confirmatory part of the study. Data analysis procedures involved Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis to test and validate the proposed scale.FindingsA fifteen-item scale divided into four constructs was obtained after refinement of the proposed scale and validation procedures (convergent and discriminant validity). The scale also has satisfactory levels of reliability.Research limitations/implicationsThe resulting scale was validated in a single institutional culture environment (HEIs in Southern Brazil). So it still should be tested in different organizational contexts and cross-culturally in different countries. The scale may be useful for decision-making improvement about knowledge management and waste reduction.Practical implicationsA scale with a practical and quick application is provided. Additionally, a classification of the waste of knowledge level was developed and it could be easily applied in different sectors or organizations.Originality/valueThe literature on waste of knowledge is limited and often confused with knowledge loss. This study provides a clear distinction between these topics, and it advances on the explanation and definition of knowledge waste. Also, it is the first study to offer a scale to measure the elements of knowledge waste.

Assessing internal organizational pathways to reduce knowledge waste: a Lean thinking perspective

“…Abdallah et al (2019) explain that the knowledge-sharing process is greatly facilitated through increased interactions between different functional areas and small group activities. Moreover, by interacting with each other, employees potentially increase their knowledge of their area of expertise and expose their talents and experiences, which decreases knowledge waste (Klein et al, 2022b).…”

“…In the study by Klein et al (2022b), the authors developed a scale to measure the waste of knowledge that was categorized into four dimensions, namely, waste of explicit knowledge, retention of tacit knowledge, underutilized talent, and overspecialization. Those dimensions represent the various types of waste knowledge that can occur in an organization and form the rationale for its use for this study.…”

“…As shown in Figure 1, the waste of knowledge is a second-order construct, composed of four first-order constructs as defined by Klein et al (2022b). So, to analyze the integrated model, the validation of the second-order construct was first undertaken.…”

“…In the study by Klein et al. (2022b), the authors developed a scale to measure the waste of knowledge that was categorized into four dimensions, namely, waste of explicit knowledge, retention of tacit knowledge, underutilized talent, and overspecialization.…”

“…Item 27 Tacit knowledge is poorly shared among employees of my sectorKlein et al (2022b) Item 28 When a new employee occupies a certain position, the tacit knowledge of the previous "occupant" is hardly shared Item 29 There is a lot of tacit knowledge that ends up being lost due to the lack of adequate knowledge management Item 30 There is a lot of tacit knowledge that ends up being lost when there is a change of people in positionsItem 32 There are professors teaching outside their area of specialization Item 33 There are employees working in positions that require skills much lower than their training or education levels Item 34 The academic backgrounds of many employees are higher than the skill levels required by their activities, which leads to a waste of knowledgeUnderused Talent (UT) Item 35 Employee capabilities are not fully utilized Klein et al (2022b) Item 36 Employee experiences are not fully explored Item 37 Employee skills are not fully utilized Item 38…”