Modelos teóricos de las habilidades sociales

This chapter gives a brief overview of the research and provides an answer to the sub-questions and main question.

The available literature highlights that a lesser extent of research is conducted that examines the relationship between enablers and all sub-variables of KM (knowledge creation, caption, dissemination and application). Most previous research examines the relation between enablers and knowledge dissemination. Moreover, many research is conducted in private organizations, even though some of the literature uses public sector organizations as case study, it is often limited to governments or

municipalities in countries other than the Netherlands. No research is conducted in semi-public organizations. Therefore, the aim of this research was to examine which human and organizational conditions are prerequisite for a successful implementation of KM in the semi-public sector, to be able to successfully implement KM in organization X. A single outcome study is carried out in a semi-public organization in the Netherlands. The theoretical framework is defined by previous research that examined enablers of knowledge management and its sub-variables. This literature review, provides an answer to sub-question one: “What organizational and human conditions are, based on the theory, prerequisite for the (semi-) public sector when effectively implementing knowledge management?”.

The literature review shows that there is a lack of available research of enablers and KM and all of its sub- variables. Still, based on the available literature it is assumed that an organizational culture of trust and social networks, formalization, a decentralized organizational structure, a KM strategy, KM leadership, rewards (extrinsic and intrinsic) and training are prerequisite when effectively implementing knowledge management in the (semi-) public sector.

The empirical research consists of a survey and in depth interviews with MT members and 2 employees per BU, to examine the perceived current situation in the semi-public organization. The outcomes of the survey and interview provide an answer to the second sub-question: “What organizational and human conditions are present in semi-public organization X?”

All BU’s indicate that an organizational culture of trust and social networks is present. In addition, BU 1 is assessed as informal and decentralized, BU 3 has a high level of job codification and a low level of rule observation and is decentralized. The HRM part of BU 4 is informal and decentralized, whereas the financial administration in BU 4 is formal and decentralized and BU 5 is assessed as formal and centralized. Furthermore, it is not clear whether or not there is a KM strategy in organization X. This is

clearly supported by the high number of “missing responses” in the survey (people whose mean score is do not know) for the variable strategy. Moreover, the survey outcomes show that there are extrinsic and intrinsic rewards in place in organization X. However, these extrinsic rewards do not include expected organizational rewards, such as bonuses, higher salary, promotions et cetera. The empirical research also shows that there is a training on KM systems. There is no training which focuses on explaining what KM means and other KM related issues. Finally, the MT creates and supports cooperation between employees and they also stimulate knowledge integration. However, the MT does not actively apply KM as example

78 for others, they do not fully understand the meaning and implications of KM and they do not acquire a stimulating role.

Finally, the results of the survey are used as input for the multiple regression, to statistically determine relations between enablers and KM and its sub-variables. These results provide an answer to sub-question three: “What organizational and human conditions are, based on the empirical research, prerequisite for semi-public organization X when effectively implementing knowledge management?”.

Important to note is that all multiple regressions violate the normality assumption. Therefore, the bootstrap method is used, to overcome the violation of the normality assumption. The outcomes of the multiple linear regression significantly support hypotheses H2a, H5 and H6, which means that

formalization, training and leadership are prerequisite when effectively implementing KM. Moreover, formalization, leadership and strategy are significant predictors of the sub-variable knowledge caption, there is a positive relationship between these variables and knowledge caption. Training is prerequisite when effectively increasing the level of knowledge dissemination. Finally, formalization and strategy are significant predictors of knowledge application, both have a positive relationship with this sub-variable of KM.

These sub-questions together provide an answer to the main-question, which is:“Which organizational and human conditions are prerequisite for a successful implementation of knowledge management in a semi-public organization in the Netherlands?”.

BU 1 and BU 4 should focus on determining a higher level of job codification, to increase the level of KM and knowledge caption, whereas it will also help to increase the level of knowledge application in BU 1. Moreover, BU 1, BU 3 and BU 4 should implement control mechanisms, to increase the level of rule observation, which will enhance employees to capture knowledge. A higher level of rule observation will also help to increase the level of knowledge application in BU 1. The MT should acquire a KM leadership role, which means that they should stimulate employees to apply KM, become more actively involved in the KM process and they should fulfil an -exemplary role. This will help to increase the level of KM and knowledge caption. Furthermore, it is recommended that the MT evaluates the effectiveness of KM at a certain point in time (after one year for example), to be able to determine areas for improvement. In addition, the organization should provide training in which the notion of KM is explained, whereas there should also be room for discussing the KM strategy, to increase the level of KM and knowledge

dissemination. Finally, it is recommended that organization X should formulate a KM strategy (mission, vision, strategy), to increase the level of knowledge caption and application. In which it is important that the KM strategy is aligned with the organizational strategy.

As already mentioned in the discussion (paragraph 5.1) some outcomes of this research contradict with previous research. These contradictions can be caused by differences in sector (private/public), cultural differences per country or differences in methodological approach. Therefore, further research is necessary to determine the causes of these differences. Moreover, it is also argued that the

generalizability of this research is limited, because it is a single outcome study. However, the limitation of generalizability is of little relevance, because the main purpose of this research was never to generalize. Still, this research is useful, because it contributes to the KM literature, by providing evidence of

79 significant predictors of KM and all of its sub-variables. It provides a theoretical and methodological base, which can be used in further research and it maximizes the variance of enablers of KM. Still, more research is needed to examine enablers of KM and its sub variables in the (semi-) public sector. In addition, there are four equivalent organizations in the Netherlands, therefore, the results can be generalized to these organizations.

Finally, to overcome the limitations of generalizability, cross-sectional research design, perceptual based measures, small sample size and the level of difficulty of the survey, it is recommended to conduct further research. Further research should replicate this study with other (larger) samples, to be able to generalize research findings. Moreover, it would be useful to conduct a longitudinal research and use cases in both public and private organizations should, to be able to examine similarities and differences in enablers. Moreover, it is recommended to conduct research in different countries and use different types of organizations, to examine differences in research outcomes.

80