Success or Failure in Knowledge Management Systems: A Universal Issue,

Abstract

Abstract. This paper takes a sociotechnical viewpoint of knowledge management system (KMS) implementation in organizations considering issues such as stakeholder disenfranchisement, lack of communication, and the low involvement of key personnel in system design asking whether KMS designers could learn from applying sociotechnical principles to their systems. The paper discusses design elements drawn from the sociotechnical principles essential for the success of IS and makes recommendations to increase the success of KMS in organizations. It also provides guidelines derived from Clegg's Principles (2000) for KMS designers to enhance their designs. Our data comes from the application of a plurality of analysis methods on a large comprehensive global survey conducted from 2007 to 2011 of 1034 participants from 76 countries. The survey covers a variety of organizations of all types and sizes from a comprehensive selection of economic sectors and industries. Our results showed that users were not satisfied with the information and knowledge systems that they were being offered. In addition to multiple technology and usability issues, there were human and organisational barriers that prevented the systems from being used to their full potential. We recommend that users of KMS are integrated into the design team so that these usability and other barriers can be addressed during the feasibility stage as well as the actual design and implementation phases. IntroductionDespite much theoretical (e.g., DeLone and McLean (1992;2003)) and some practical works within organisations that study measures of organizational support such as * To maintain the page limit imposed by IFIP 8.6, we eliminated a number of tables, literature, and other information from this paper. Interested readers may contact authors for them. (Jennex and Olfman, 2003). Davenport, DeLone, and Beers (1998), in the context of KM projects, consider senior management support, motivational incentives, and knowledge friendly culture among their eight factors for success. In their KM success model, Massey, Montoya-Weiss, and O'Driscoll (2002) consider three key managerial influences: coordination, control, and measurement; disciplined project management; and leadership. However, no study considered detailed sociotechnical factors in a wide population of KMS users, managers, and knowledge workers. The question, therefore, this paper addresses is: what can KMS designers learn from sociotechnical principles to improve the success rate, and avoid the failure rates of these systems, and reduce user experiences and beliefs about system quality and knowledge/information quality that then discourage KMS use? In particular, the paper addresses the underlying factors that cause failure in three specific sociotechnical areas: technology; human; and organisational. Additionally, it investigates the underlying organisational, human and technical conditions that should be put in place as part of the overall knowledge management system design.The reasons for KMS failure are...

Knowledge management in practice in academic libraries

“…For knowledge to transfer successfully, Coakes et al (2013: 55) recommend:requiring encouraging and rewarding the sharing of information through organizational policies, since we find that people do not share information because they do not want to part with their knowledge, or they do not feel that it is one of their tasks or job role.Similarly, Liebowitz (2016) argues that KM must be not siloed and must continue to be an integrative mechanism that bridges across the functional silos in an organization.…”

The moderating effect of electronic strategy (e-strategy) on the relationship between perceived usefullness and the intention to adopt online banking in Malaysia

“…This failure usually happens at the implementation phase (Abbasi, Tarhini, Elyas & Shah, 2015;Legris, Ingham & Collerette, 2003;Tan & Sutherland, 2004) and spans from under-usage to outright repudiation (Venkatesh and Davis, 2000). The primary reasons for such failures include poor alignment or fit between the system and its end users (Davis, 1993), weak configuration fit such as inconsistent strategy, structure and technology issues (Sauer, Southon & Dampney, 1997) and much recently human and organisational barriers (Coakes, Amar & Granados, 2013).…”

Fostering Knowledge Sharing in NGOs

“…Hurley and Green [26] argue that funding agencies are particularly eager to encourage knowledge sharing between organizations. Sharing knowledge implies that organizational silos are overcome and that organizations transit from a culture of information hoarding to information sharing [8]. On the fourth level, organizations embrace social media and the role of IT shifts from being central to being supportive.…”

“…An emergent design means that the problem is reconsidered based on new observations as the project is already deployed. Indeed, failure to include stakeholders in the design phase is seen as a major reason for failures in knowledge management [8].…”