نقش قابلیت‌های فرایندی مدیریت دانش در توانمندسازی ساختاری منابع انسانی (مورد مطالعه، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی)

نوع مقاله : مطالعه موردی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری مدیریت صنعتی ـ ‌تحقیق در عملیات، دانشکده مدیریت و حسابداری، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران

2 استادیار گروه مدیریت صنعتی، دانشکده علوم اداری و اقتصاد، دانشگاه ولی‌عصر (عج)، رفسنجان، ایران

3 استادیار گروه مدیریت و کارافرینی، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه کاشان، کاشان، ایران

10.47176/smok.2018.4972

چکیده

امروزه اهمیت نیروی انسانی به عنوان برجسته­ترین عامل مزیت رقابتی، بر کسی پوشیده نیست. از سوی دیگر، تغییر ماهیت فعالیتهای سازمانها به کارهای دانشی موجب اهمیت یافتن روزافزون کاربرد مدیریت دانش در سازمانها شده است. از این رو سازمانهای موفق به شکل مستمری میزان تولید، نشر، تبادل و به کارگیری دانش در بین کارکنان خود را به وسیله روشهای مختلف، اندازه‌گیری و مورد ازریابی قرار می‌دهند تا از این طریق بتوانند راه­کارهای نیل به اهداف سازمانی را کسب کنند.اغلب پژوهشهای پیشین در این حوزه، قابلیت‌های ساختاری مدیریت دانش را مدنظر قرار داده و به قابلیت‌های فرایندی مدیریت دانش کمتر توجه شده است. در این پژوهش بررسی تأثیر قابلیت‌های فرایندی مدیریت دانش بر توانمندسازی ساختاری منابع انسانی مدنظر است. داده­های این پژوهش از طریق پرسشنامه فرستاده شده برای 78 نفر از استادان و کارکناندانشگاه علامه طباطبائی جمع­آوری شده است. تحلیل داده­ها نیز با استفاده از روش الگوسازی معادلات ساختاری مبتنی بر حدأقل مربعات جزئی (PLS) انجام شده است. از دیگر نوآوریهای پژوهش می­توان به نوآوری روشی و استفاده از روش PLS اشاره کرد که نسبت به دیگر روشهای الگوسازی معادلات ساختاری مبتنی بر کوواریانس به داده­های کمتری نیاز دارد و با داده­های غیر نرمال نیز قابل اجرا است. نتایج پژوهش حاکی از تأثیر مثبت و معنادار مدیریت دانش بر توانمندسازی منابع انسانی است.در این میان، کاربرد دانش بیش از دیگر قابلیت‌ها، توانمندسازی ساختاری منابع انسانی را تحت تأثیر قرار می­دهد. در نهایت، پیشنهادهایی برای مدیران و پژوهشهای آینده پژوهشگران ارائه شده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

The role of knowledge management process capabilities in structural human resources empowerment (case study: allameh tabatabaee university)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Saeid Sadeghi Darvazeh 1
  • Abbas Shool 2
  • Esmaeil Mazroei Nasrabadi 3
  • Ali Farhadian 3
1 Ph.D. candidate of industrial management, faculty of management and accounting, Allameh Tabatabaee University. Tehran, Iran
2 Assistant professor at the department of industrial management, faculty of administrative sciences and economics, Valiasr University, Rafsanjan, Iran
3 Assistant professor at the department of management and entrepreneurship, faculty of humanities, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran
چکیده [English]

Today, the importance of manpower as the most important factor of competitive advantage is quite evident. Furthermore, the change in the nature of the activities of organizations towards knowledge measures has augmented the importance of the application of knowledge management in organizations. Hence, successful organizations, continuously measure and evaluate the amount of production, distribution, exchange and utilization of knowledge among their employees by various methods, in order to find out the best solutions for achieving organizational goals. Most previous studies in this field take into account the structural capabilities of knowledge management and have paid little attention to its process capabilities. In this research, the effect of knowledge management process capabilities on the structural empowerment of human resources is assessed. Data are collected through a questionnaire distributed among 78 professors and employees of Allameh Tabatabaee University. Data analysis is performed by partial squares (PLS) structural equations modeling. Among research innovations, one refers to the innovative use of PLS method, which needs less data compared to other methods of modeling of covariance-based structural equations and can be carried on with abnormal data. The results of this study indicate that KM positively and significantly influences human resource empowerment. In the meantime, applying knowledge affects the structural empowerment of human resources more than other capabilities. Finally, there are suggestions for future managers and researchers.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • knowledge management (KM)
  • empowerment
  • competitive advantage
  • structural equations modeling

مراجع

  1. Adams, G.L. and Lamont, B.T. (2003). Knowledge management systems and developing sustainable competitive advantage, Journal of Knowledge Management, 7:2, 142-54.
  2. Alavi, M. and Leidner, D. E. (2001). Knowledge management and knowledge management system: Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quartely, 25:1, 107-136.
  3. Azizinejad, Bahram, Jenaabadi, Hosein, (2014). Study of the Relationship between Knowledge Management and Managers’ Empowerment in Urmia Payame Noor University, International Research Journal of Management Sciences. Vol., 2 (8), 246-251.
  4. Chang, T.C. and Chuang, S.H. (2011) Performance implications of knowledge management processes: examining the roles of infrastructure capability and business strategy, Expert Systems with Applications, 36:2, 4087-100.
  5. Ching Lin & Chih Huang. (2009). Understanding social loafing in knowledge contribution from the perspectives of justice and trust . Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 6156–6163.
  6. Claver-Cortés, E., Zaragoza-Sáez, P. and Pertusa-Ortega, E. (2007). Organizational structure features supporting knowledge management processes, Journal of Knowledge Management, 11:4, 45-57.
  7. Darroch, J. and McNaughton, R. (2002). Examining the link between knowledge management practices and types of innovation, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 3:3, 210-22.
  8. Dimitriades, Z., & Kufidu, S. (2004). Individual, job, organizational and contextual correlates of employment empowerment: some Greek evidence.
  9. Emadzade, M. K., Mashayekhi, B. and Abdar, E. (2012). Knowledge management capabilities and organizational performance, Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary esearch In Business, 3:11, 781-790.
  10. Ergeneli, A., Arı, G. S., & Metin, S. (2007). Psychological empowerment and its relationship to trust in immediate managers. Journal of Business Research, 60(1), 41-49.
  11. Esposito-Vinzi, V., Wynne, W., Chin W.W., Henseler, J. and Wang, H. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of partial least squares:concepts, Methods and Applications. New York: Springer Verlag.
  12. Gadenne, D., & Sharma, B. (2009). An investigation of the hard and soft quality management factors of Australian SMEs and their association with firm performance. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 26(9), 865-880.
  13. Ghobadi Ansaroodi, Kazem Talebiannia, Hosein, Najafzadeh, Mohammad rahim,(2013). The relationship between knowledge Management and occupational empowerment in professional administration of sport and youth in East Azerbaijan Province, International Research Journal of Applied and Basic Sciences , Vol, 7 (6): 339-346.
  14. Gouvihaus, R. P. and Costa, P.E.C. (2004). Knowledge Management: Breaking the Cultural Barriers to Motivate the Knowledge Sharing within Organizations, XXIV Brazilian Symposium on Production Engineering, October, Santa Catarina, Brazil.
  15. Hair J.F.,Jr., Black W.C., Babin B.J.,Anderson R.E & Tatham R.L. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. New Jersy: Pearson Education.
  16. Hulland. (1999). Use of partial least Science, Environment, Engineering and Technology Griffith University.
  17. Koberg, C. S., Boss, R. W., Senjem, J. C., & Goodman, E. A. (1999). Antecedents and Outcomes of Empowerment Empirical Evidence from the Health Care Industry. Group & Organization Management, 24(1), 71-91.
  18. Lauria, E. J. M., & Duchessi, P. J. (2007). A methodology for developing Bayesian networks: An application to information technology (IT) implementation. European Journal of Operational Research , 179(1),234–252.
  19. Liljander, V., Polsa, P., & van Riel, A. (2009). Modelling consumer responses to an apparel store brand: Store image as a risk reducer. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 16, 281–290.
  20. Lin, H. (2013). The effects of knowledge management capabilities and partnership attributes on the stage-based e-business diffusion, Internet Research, 23:4, 439-464.
  21. Nielsen, A.P. (2006). Understanding dynamic capabilities through knowledge management, Journal of Knowledge Management, 10:4, 59-71.
  22. Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H.  (1997). The Knowledge-Creating Company, Oxford University Press.
  23. Nonaka, I., von Krogh, G. and Voelpel, S. (2006). Organizational knowledge creation theory: evolutionary paths and future advances, Organization Studies, 27:8, 1179-1208.
  24. Penrose, E. T. (1959). The Theory of the Growth of the Firm, New York: John Wiley.
  25. Pyka, A. (2002). Innovation networks in economics: from the incentive-based to the knowledge based approaches, European Journal of Innovation Management, 5:3, 152-163.
  26. Quinn, R. E., & Spreitzer, G. M. (1997). The road to empowerment: Seven questions every leader should consider. Organizational Dynamics, 26(2), 37-49.
  27. Ravanpykar, Yousef, Fyzi, Jafarsadghe & Pashazadh, Yousef, 2014, Examine the relationship between knowledge management with organizational learning and employee empowerment in national companies of south oil producing (Case study: OIL WELFARE SERVICE COMPANIES), Indian J.Sci.Res. 5 (1): 284-295.
  28. Rivard & Huff. (1988). Factors of success for End-User computing. Communications of the ACM 31:5, May, pp, 552-561.
  29. Roy, Y. J. C., & Sheena, S. (2005). Empowerment through choice a critical analysis of the effects of choice in organizations. Research in Organizational Behaviors, 27, 41-79.
  30. Sandhawalia, B. S. and Dalcher, D. (2011). Developing knowledge management capabilities: a structured approach, Journal of Knowledge Management, 15:2, 313-328.
  31. Shaabani, E., Ahmadi, H. and Yazdani, H. R. (2012)). ‘Do interactions among elements of knowledge management lead to acquiring core competencies?, Business Strategy Series, 13:6, 307-322.
  32. Shani, A.B., Sena, J.A. and Olin, T. (2003). Knowledge management and new product development: a study of two companies, European Journal of Innovation Management, 6:3, 137-149.
  33. Shaw, N. C. (2001). Knowledge Management Basics (Foundation for Malcolm Bald ridge Award). George Mason University, School of Management.
  34. Spritzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of management journal, 38(51), 1442-1465.
  35. Thomas, K. W., & Velthouse, B. A. (1990). Cognitive elements of empowerment: An “interpretive” model of intrinsic task motivation. Academy of management review, 15(4), 666-681.
  36. Tseng, Y.H. and Lin, C.T. (2011). Enhancing enterprise agility by deploying agile drivers, capabilities and provider, Information Sciences, 181:17, 3693-3708.
  37. Wen. (2010). Linking Bayesian networks and PLS path modeling for causal analysis. Expert Systems with Applications, 134–139.:37.
  38. Wixom, B. H., & Watson, H. J. (2001). An empirical investigation of the factors affecting data warehousing success. MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 17-41.
مدیریت راهبردی دانش سازمانی
دوره 1، شماره 1 - شماره پیاپی 1
شماره پیاپی 1، فصلنامه تابستان
تیر 1397
صفحه 49-72

فایل ها

سابقه مقاله

  • تاریخ دریافت: 19 خرداد 1397
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 24 شهریور 1397
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 20 مرداد 1397

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار