The third objective of the study was to explore UNZA’s administrative culture in knowledge management. The reviewed literature in Chapter Two identified culture as one of the most important knowledge management enabler which can either hinder of promote effective knowledge management (Rollet, 2003). Further, the literature indicated that a positive culture could encourage knowledge communication, collaboration, cooperation, sharing and contribution. Botha & Fouché (2001) are quoted in literature review supporting that culture is the key factor that determines the success or otherwise with knowledge management and that culture as advanced by Roobin (2004) is a set of values, beliefs, norms, meaning and procedures shared by organization members. Therefore, these values, beliefs, norms and procedures affect the way in which knowledge is managed, and can as a result, either encourage or discourage the use of knowledge management practices (Davel & Snyman, 2005). Literature further indicated that a knowledge enriching culture had attributes such as intense communication climate of openness and trust, a clear understanding of the mutual benefits of knowledge sharing, urge to exploit knowledge by collaborative joint ventures and cooperation (Botha & Fouché, 2001).
117
The findings of the study in the survey established that UNZA’s administrative culture was not conducive for knowledge management. The survey established that something was being done on UNZA’s knowledge communication in administration where there was an intense, open, widespread and free flowing knowledge and information communication in administration and across organizational boundaries, which was understood, by mutual trust, understanding and respect. The survey showed that a cumulative percentage of 50.7% of respondents indicated higher scores of recently implemented, progressing well and visible throughout the organization on the variable of communication, thereby recognising that something was being done on the variable of communication. The survey also established that something was being done on collaboration in administration where collaborative relationships existed in forms of alliances and partnerships among units and departments for the purpose of joint knowledge development, innovation and knowledge sharing. The survey showed a cumulative percentage of 60.6% of respondents indicated higher scores of recently implemented, progressing well and visible throughout the organization on the variable of collaboration, thereby recognising that something was being done on collaboration.
In establishing workplace culture, the survey revealed that nothing was being done, where knowledge sharing and information exchange was not promoted in administration by management support and was not encouraged through use of physical work environment such as open areas, co-located offices and informal meeting places. The survey showed that a cumulative percentage of 52.1% of respondents indicated lower scores of not taking place at all, aware of this practice and considering implementation, on the variable of workplace, with not taking place at all ,having a higher percentage of 22.7% of respondents. This recognises that nothing was being done on workplace culture of knowledge sharing and information exchange, apart from some respondents being aware of the practice and others indicating that the practice was being considered for implementation.
On knowledge sharing in administration, the survey revealed that nothing was being done, as a natural awareness of mutual benefits of sharing knowledge was not instilled in all administrative staff and had not become a way of life. Management did not recognize knowledge sharing and knowledge creation efforts and did not firmly discourage knowledge and information hoarding. The survey showed that a cumulative percentage of 50.6% of respondents indicated lower scores of not taking place at all, aware of this practice and considering implementation, on the variable of knowledge sharing, with aware of this
118
practice, having a higher percentage of 25.3% of respondents. This recognises that nothing was being done on knowledge sharing, despite people being aware of the practice but evidence showed that the implementation was not done.
In a similar circumstance, nothing was being done on knowledge contribution in administration, as a culture of voluntary contribution to UNZA’s knowledge base was not widely entrenched among administrative members, teams and groups and the utilization of the knowledge base was not well engrained as standard operating procedure. The survey showed that a cumulative percentage of 57.4% of respondents indicated lower scores of not taking place at all, aware of this practice and considering implementation, on the variable of knowledge contribution, with aware of this practice, having a higher percentage of 22.7% of respondents. This recognises that nothing was being done on knowledge contribution, despite people being aware of the practice but evidence showed that the implementation was not done.
On the other hand, the results of the interview established that there was a culture of knowledge communication through prescribed processes such as memoranda, reports, emailing system, meetings, workshops and meetings. However, most interviewees revealed that there were numerous challenges faced by administrative staff when acquiring knowledge from each other, vis-à-vis, conservative and bureaucratic management style, lack of mutual trust, knowledge hoarding, lack of prescribed means and official platform for knowledge sharing and non-codification of knowledge. The interview further revealed that management encouraged knowledge creation and sharing through organization of workshops, provision of technology for knowledge sharing, holding of monthly and quarterly meetings, through commendation of staff who innovated. Management also encouraged knowledge creation through compelling staff to prepare operational manuals, as well as encouraging heads of units to share knowledge. On administrative staff knowledge contribution, the interviews established that administrative staff did not voluntary contribute their knowledge to the knowledge base of the university. The only means of contribution was through appointment into committees.
This study explored the administrative culture of UNZA and shows that the responses from the survey and those from the interviews are synchronizing, of course after careful analysis. The survey has shown that the administrative culture was not conducive for some knowledge management practices such as workplace culture, knowledge sharing and
119
knowledge contribution. Whilst the survey critically exposes the poor practices of workplace culture, knowledge sharing and knowledge contribution, the interviews show that the administrative culture embraces knowledge sharing to some extent, though with numerous challenges of knowledge hoarding, lack of mutual trust, hierarchical boundaries and lack of prescribed means of knowledge sharing. In addition, interviews revealed that management was making efforts to encourage knowledge creation and sharing. However, the sentiments in the interview are not different from responses from the survey on knowledge contribution being poor.
On a positive note, findings from both the survey and interviews established that the administrative culture was conducive for knowledge communication and collaboration. This study has therefore shown that UNZA’s administrative culture has potential to support knowledge management practices, but not maturely conducive, as some areas need to be improved in order to fully support practices of knowledge sharing and knowledge contribution. As Botha & Fouché (2001) stated that the daily routine of organizations should involve exploitation of opportunities created by a workplace setting of open spaces, communication and collaboration across organization hierarchical structures and team and organization achievements to be socialized, there is enough room for UNZA’s administrative culture to be improved.
This section can therefore be concluded that UNZA is making steady developments towards an administrative culture for knowledge management, but it is still not conducive. The culture was only conducive in knowledge communication and collaboration, but had challenges in knowledge sharing and knowledge contribution. The University of Zambia profile on administrative culture can therefore be placed on the third score, which indicates
considering implementation on the questionnaire of the survey. The university needs to
create an enabling environment for implementation of knowledge sharing and knowledge contribution strategies for the culture to be conducive for knowledge management and for the efforts to be ranked as progressing well.
5.3 UNZA’S ADMINISTRATIVE AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE WITH