International Journal of Information Technology and. Business Management. 27'" May 2012. Vol.1 No. 1 ir. O 2012 JITBM & AM. All rights reserved r. ,- ,".
International Journal of Information Technology and Business Management 27'" May 2012. Vol.1 No. 1 O 2012 JITBM & A M . All rights reserved ISSN 2304-0777
ir r. ,- ," . @ 2,+f;wx ,3&%k3. "-:;yz ~ !
www.iitbin.com
A THEORETICAL STUDY OF THE SAND CONE MODEL AND KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT FROM MALAYSIAN UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES PERSPECTIVE M. Saufi, C. Rusuli Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Johor, Malaysia. Tasmin, R.
Universiti Tun Husseii~Onn Malaysia, Johor, Malaysia.
Josu Takala Department of Production, University of Vassa, Vassa, Finland
Abstract: This paper outlines the previous research on the theoretical study for Knowledge Management. The current study of this paper seeks to explore whether knowledge creation, knowledge acquisition, lcnowledge captnre and knowledge sharing possibly have a significant impact and gaps in knowledge management practice at Malaysian university libraries. Therefore, this paper adopts the "Sand Cone Model" approach to gauge its feasibility to be incorporated into this research. The knowledge contribution of this research will be employed to elaborate and integrate using Stmctnral Equation Model (SEM) for some of the confumatory factors that can influence the knowledge management practices. The expected outcome and gaps of knowledge in theoretical model could also provide some direction for future research. Keywords: Knowledge management, Knowledge creation, Knowledge acquisition, Knowledge capture, Knowledge sharing, Stmctural Equation Model (SEM), Sand Cone Model
INTRODUCTION This article considers some of the principles and practices commonly associated with "knowledge management" (KM) in so far as they seem to be of potential importance or relevance to library and information professionals. The multidisciplinary nature of knowledge management has resulted in input kom people in different fields including economists, human resource professionals, IT professionals and
library and information professionals. In this case, individual and co~npetencies has included in familiarity with information and knowledge, and with users and related technologies. Sabri (2005) in his study stated that data are simple, facts and raw material that, in and of themselves, represent observations, or facts out of context, and therefore not directly meaningful and may be of little use. However, information is data that have been linked with other data and converted into useful context for specific use. But, it is
that the greatest challenge facing librarians moving to KM is moving fiom the traditional role of housing information to analyzing and using the information. Information can be viewed as the explicit form of knowledge and LM as management of the tacit knowledge inside people's heads to make it accessible to others as possible. CONCLUSIONS It can be clearly seen that the knowledge management environment in which academic libraries operate is changing. It is both faced with challenges and opportunities. Academic libraries need to respond to these challenges in order to s e n e better the needs of the entire academic community. One way of doing that is engaging in knowledge management practices, that is, creating, capturing, sharing and utilizing the knowledge to achieve the library goals. Knowledge management is a viable means in which academic libraries could improve their services and become more responsive to the needs of users in the university. People gain knowledge fiom their experiences and their peel-s' expertise. Academic libraries need to recognize the laowledge of its staff and create an environment in which their knowledge can be valued and shared. The proposed shuctural model of Knowledge Management Practices of this research will be employed to elaborate and integrate using a structural equation model for some of the factors that can influence the knowledge management practices and library users' satisfaction. Also, the proposed of the Sand Cone model will be employed to illustrate the significant balanced and well founded of the Knowledge Management. The expected outcomc of this theoretical model could provide some direction for future additional research on KM practices and library users' satisfaction in Malaysian universities. REFERENCES 1. Anoa, A. (2003). Society, knowledge incubation, and management. The Guardian, 75. 2.
Drucker, P. F. (1998). Ha~vardbusiness review on knowledge management: Harvard Business Press.
3.
Ferdows, K., & De Meyer, A. (1990). Lasting improvements in manufacturing
performance: in search of a new theory. Journal of Operations management, 9(2), 168-184.
4.
Gold, A. H., Malhotra, A,, & Segars, A. H. (2001). Knowledge management: An organizational capabilities perspective. Journal of management information systems, 18(1), 185-214.
5. Gorman, G. (2004). The uniqueness of knowledge management-or the Emperor's new clothes? Library Management and Information Services Retrieved 1, 19, 6 . Grobler, A., & Grubner, A. (2006). An empirical model of the relationships between manufactu~ing capabilities. Interrzational Journal of Operations & Production Management, 26(5), 458485.
7.
Hamid, S., & Nayan, J. M. (2005). Preliminary study of knowledge management in a libraiy: a case study oJ the National Library ofMalaysia.
8. Hansen, M. T., Nohria, N., & Tiemey, T. (1999). What's your strategy for managing laowledge? Knowledge management: critical perspectives on business and management, 322. 9. Hussain, F., Lucas, C., & Ali, M. (2004). Managing knowledge effectively. Journal of Knowledge Management Practice, 5
10. Koenig, M. E. D. (1997). Intellectual capital and how to leverage it. Bottom Line: Managing Library Finances, The, 10(3), 112-118. 11. Lee, Y. C., & Lee, S. K. (2007). Capabilities, processes, and performance of knowledge management: A shuctural approach. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 17(1), 21-41.
19. Reid, I. C. (2000). The web, knowledge
12. Malhotra, Y. (1997). Knowledge management in inquiring organizations. AMCIS 1997 Proceedings, 110. 13. Maponya, P. M. (2004). Knowledge management practices in academic libraries: a case study of the University of Natal, Pietermaritzburg Libraries SCECSAL Proceedings.
management and universities. from http:/lausweb.scu.edu.au/aw2k/papcrslrei d/paper.html 20. Senge, P. M. (2003). Taking Personal Change Seriously: The Impact of' Organizational Learning" on Management Practice. The Academy of Management Executive (1993-2005), 17(2), 47-50.
14. Mohamad, M., Ng, T. C., & Abdulai, D. (2002). Mahaihir Mohamad: a visionary & his vision of' Malaysia's k-economy: Pelanduk Pubns Sdn Bhd.
21. Shin, M., Holden, T., & Schmidt, R. A. (2001). From knowlcdge theory to managcmeilt practice: towards an Information integrated approach. procersing & management, 37(2), 335355.
15. Naidoo, D. (2002). Organizational cultu1-e and subculture influences on the implementation and outcomes of aspects on internal quality assurance initiates. http: Citeseer.
22. Strassmann, P. A. (1999). Measuring and managing knowledge capital. Knowledge Executive Report.
16. Narasimban, R., Swink, M., & Kim, S. W. (2005). An exploratory study of manufacturing practice and performance inter~elationships: Implications for capability progression. Inlernational Journal of Operations & Production Management, 25(10), 1013-1033. 17. Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1991). The laowledge-creating company. Harvard business review, 85(718), 162. 18. Olu Adeyoyin, S. (2006). Managing the Library's Corporatc Culture for Organizational Efficiency, Productivity and Enhanced Service. Library Philosoplzy and Practice, 8(2), 5 .
23. Takala, J., Leskinen, J., Siwsuo, H., Himela, J., & Kekale, T. (2006). The sand conc model: illustrating multifocused strategies. Management Decision, 44(3), 335-345. 24. Tasmin, R., A Rahman, N., A Hamid, N., Rusuli, C., & Saufi, M. (2010). Knowledge management orientation at public and private universities in Malaysia: an empirical overview of organizational lcnowledgc practices.
25. Wen, S. (2005). Implementing knowledge management in academic libraries: a pragmatic approach. Aniz Arbor
