Knowledge management in academia: survey, analysis and perspective

Abstract

Abstract:Research on knowledge management in academia has become a hot issue and a promising research area. Most research, however, has focused on general educational organizations, such as high schools and universities. This paper concentrates on understanding the problems of knowledge creators per se instead of the general student population, as disclosed by a survey of the scientific knowledge management and creation process at the Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (JAIST). By using comparison, classification, cross tabulation, and other analysis methods, some subtle issues and hidden problems have been discovered in this survey, such as the unevenness of technical support among different schools, ignorance of cooperation as one source of knowledge, different requirements of foreign and Japanese researchers, and so on. Along with these findings, we also present our corresponding analysis and suggestions for more effective knowledge management and better creativity support, and some perspectives and future research directions in this field.

Improving knowledge management processes: a hybrid positive approach

“…The third category refers to adjustment between IT systems/processes and users' needs and activities. Examples are adopting appropriate IT for the particular organization and/or team needs and implementing a laboratory knowledge management system (Armbrecht et al , 2001; Rosen et al , 2007; Tian et al , 2006a). The fourth category refers to IT systems and processes supporting activities such as planning (e.g.…”

“…lack of experience and familiarity with IT systems, poor verbal and/or written communications research skills, difficulties in managing time and information overload; Alavi and Leidner, 2001; Davis et al , 2005b; Eppler and Mengis, 2004; Riege, 2005; Rosen et al , 2007; Sun and Scott, 2005). This category also includes factors such as the lack of openness to new ideas (Sun and Scott, 2005), and neglecting other people's skills (Alavi and Leidner, 2001; Tian et al , 2006a). The third category refers to unethical behaviors (i.e.…”

“…Several factors are transversal to several KM processes. For example, Tian et al (2006a) suggested that implementing a laboratory KM system helps with knowledge acquisition, capturing, creation, and sharing. Barriers and facilitators are therefore separated within each KM process for analytical reasons and to facilitate the interpretation.…”

Knowledge-sharing and collaborative behaviour: An empirical study on a Portuguese higher education institution

“…The literature regarding the collaboration in HEIs highlights that ‘collaboration is characterized by strong pragmatism and a high degree of self-organisation’ [19], and that its members collaborate when necessary, configuring itself as a weak point in this kind of organisation [38,39]. In general, HEIs members emphasise self-study more and they are not always aware of the valuable expertise within the HEIs that can contribute to their work, preferring instead to achieve their goals and objectives independently and individually [1,29,38]. Collaboration activities can result in publications, dissemination of research results, the creation of new knowledge, and consist an important source of career advancement, reputation and self-empowerment of the members (professors and researchers) of HEIs [40].…”

“…According to Tian et al [38], collaboration and teamwork are not usually a concern in the context of HEIs. Probably due to the cult of the individual expert and self-motivation [30], members of HEIs prioritise self-study as the principal knowledge source [5], making collaboration secondary [38]. Gray [34] claims that ‘the opportunity for collaborating arises because parties recognize the potential advantages of working together’.…”