An investigation into the critical factors involved in developing a Knowledge Management system in Project based manufacturing industries

Queensland University of Technology
Faculty of Built Environment and Engineering
BEN910 – INTEGRATED PROJECT
An investigation into the critical factors
involved in developing a Knowledge
Management system in Project based
manufacturing industry (Automobile
Components Manufactures)
FINAL REPORT
Lecturer : Wim Dekkers
Supervisor : Bambamg Trigunarsyah
Student Name : Gnanamoorthy Gowri Shankar
Student No. : N6211216
Course : BN89, Master in Project Management

Gnanamoorthy Gowri Shankar -N6211216 BEN910 – Integrated Project
2
Statement of Authorship
The work contained in this project report has not been previously submitted for a
degree or diploma at any other tertiary educational institution. To the best of my
knowledge and belief, the project report contains no material previously
published or written by another person except where due reference is made.
Signed:
Date : 11-06-2010

3
Abstract
Knowledge is one of the critical factors in the total efficiency of the production in
any industry. This makes Knowledge Management (KM) in an organisation to be
a vital component of the organisation. But KM in the organisation is not
established as it should be. The research will identify the root causes of this issue
and to provide recommendations to the organisations to improve the KM in their
organisation.
The study of the literature showed that the KM has been influenced by various
factors which are still to be addressed. Some of the factors are organisational
elements (organisational structure, top management and individual employee),
issues in knowledge sharing (culture, motivation, attitude and assumptions) and
issues in knowledge creation (ignorance by top management and assumption
that it is research and development work).
The study of the current scenario of KM in Automobile Components
Manufacturers (ACM) with the help of survey with the management people who
are responsible for KM in ACM’s of their companies showed that the
manufacturers know that the KM is vital and they have already implemented in
their organisation in some form. But they have not given enough attention to KM
and it is still in unproductive stage. The ignorance by the top management is the
vital setback for KM. The ignorance is due to their ignorance of the root causes
and how to handle it.
The study will help the manufacturers to identify the problems which are
potentially influencing their KM implementation. The recommendations given in
the research like motivating employees to share knowledge, creating knowledge
base, implementing KM as a part of the job, etc., will help the manufacturers in
implementing the KM in an efficient and appropriate way.

4
Acknowledgements
This research project would never have been a success without the help and
support of a few people. I take this opportunity to extend my sincere gratitude to
them.
First and Foremost, let me thank my supervisor Prof. Bambang Trigunarsyah. He
owes a great deal of appreciation for being supportive, approachable and
realistic. He provided me information about project research resources and
research methodology and the he further guided me through each steps most
effectively.
I then thank all my colleagues, seniors and industrial experts who participated in
the survey conducted as part of the research. Their valuable comments and
suggestions proved very helpful. Furthermore, I thank all the researchers and
organisations, across the globe, whose work provided me extensive knowledge
on the project topic.

5
Table of Contents
Statement of Authorship .......................................................................................2
Abstract.................................................................................................................3
Acknowledgements...............................................................................................4
Table of Contents..................................................................................................5
1. Introduction....................................................................................................7
1.1 Problem statement...................................................................................7
1.2 Aims and objectives.................................................................................7
1.3 Approach .................................................................................................8
2 Literature Review...........................................................................................9
2.1 Introduction..............................................................................................9
2.2 Definitions and concepts..........................................................................9
2.3 Knowledge- related project work environments .....................................12
2.4 Elaboration of Problem Statement.........................................................16
2.5 Summary of literature review .................................................................33
3 Research Methodology................................................................................34
3.1 Research approach ...............................................................................34
3.2 Research instrument..............................................................................34
3.3 Contact method .....................................................................................34
3.4 Data analysis .........................................................................................34
4 Limitations of Research project....................................................................42
5 Results and Discussions..............................................................................42
6 Conclusion...................................................................................................43
7 Recommendations for ACM organisations...................................................44
List of References...............................................................................................45
Cover Letter of Survey........................................................................................51
QUESTIONNAIRE ..............................................................................................53
Survey Results....................................................................................................56
Project Journal....................................................................................................59
Contact Records .................................................................................................63
Appendix A - Detailed background of ACM Project.............................................64

6
Appendix B – ACM Organisation Structure.........................................................66
Appendix C – ACM Process flow chart ...............................................................67
Appendix D – ACM Project team structure .........................................................68
Table of Figures
Figure 2.1: Four knowledge-related project work environments .........................13
Figure 2.2: Knowledge-related project work environments .................................13
Figure 2.3: Transformation of individual team member’s knowledge into project
knowledge....................................................................................................19
Figure 2.4: Competence transformation of an engineer in the project/working life
.....................................................................................................................20
Figure 2.5: Knowledge application in ACM Projects ...........................................21
Figure 2.6: ACM Project culture..........................................................................29
Figure 2.7: Knowledge creation process.............................................................31
Figure 3.1: Survey result of Ques: 1 ...................................................................35
Figure 3.6: Survey result of Ques: 12 .................................................................40
Figure 3.7: Survey result of Ques: 15 .................................................................41

7
1. Introduction
This research work studies the critical factors involved in developing a
Knowledge Management system in Automobile Components manufacturing
industries. The research will identify the critical factors which potentially influence
Knowledge Management (KM) in an organisation. A study will be conducted to
understand the past and current scenarios of the factors influencing KM in an
oraganisation. Based on the results of the study, the conclusions will be derived
and recommendations will be given to the industry for better practices which will
help in implementation of KM.
1.1 Problem statement
In my professional experience with Automobile Components Manufacturers
(ACM) projects I monitored that due to the lack of appropriate knowledge in the
project, there is some reduced efficiency in work. I identified the issue as making
similar mistakes and getting delays due to lack of knowledge sharing. Knowledge
sharing and knowledge management are critical in the project based industry but
there is no proper management in KM in the ACM projects (industry). This drives
me to investigate the root causes of this issue and provide solutions.
1.2 Aims and objectives
This research project aim is to develop and understand the knowledge
management functioning in project based manufacturing industry (ACM).
Key objectives that are aimed to be achieved in this research project are:
To develop an understanding of knowledge acquisition, knowledge
creation, knowledge sharing and knowledge management system in ACM
To identify the benefits from Knowledge Management system in ACM
To identify the key factors which potentially influence knowledge
management system in an organisation and their effects on KM

8
To make out the reasons for implementing/not implementing Knowledge
Management system in ACM
To review the current status of Knowledge Management system that is
implemented in ACM
The results of the analysis will be used to provide practical advice to ACM
organisations in the form of guidelines. The outcome of this research project will
help to develop a knowledge sharing mechanism in project based manufacturing
organisations.
1.3 Approach
The study of the literature is used to develop the understandings of the KM, its
benefits in ACM and identifying the key factors of KM. The literature review of this
research project is from sources such as- high rated journals, books, websites
and online publications. With the help of the results from literature review, a
questionnaire for survey has been developed to understand the effects of the key
factors of KM, reasons for implementing or not implementing knowledge
management and current status of implemented KM in ACM. The questionnaire
for this survey is developed to pursue responses to questions in a direction that
would generate the most beneficial information on the knowledge management
system issues. It will be aimed at the experienced professionals who are
responsible for its successful management of ACM projects. After analysing the
survey data, the critical factors that affecting knowledge management system
development and functioning will be identified.

9
2 Literature Review
2.1 Introduction
The review of literature is performed to identify the critical factors which can
potentially influence KM in an organisation. The critical factors will be identified
by studying the benefits and phases of KM in an organisation. The phases of KM
includes knowledge creation, knowledge sharing and knowledge deployment.
The study will be on the general factors that influence KM in an organisation and
individual focus will be on KM in Automobile Components Manufacturers (ACM).
2.2 Definitions and concepts
2.2.1 Knowledge and Knowledge Management
Knowledge is a whole set of intuition, reasoning, insights, experiences related to
technology, products, processes, customers, markets, competition and so on that
enable effective action. Knowledge Management (KM) as a systematic,
organized, explicit and deliberate ongoing process of creating, disseminating,
applying, renewing and updating the knowledge for achieving organisational
objectives (Pillania, 2004, 2005).
Knowledge can be defined as “understanding gained through experience or
study.” In order to perform specialized task a person should be acquainted with
the ‘know-how’ of the things. Knowledge is an element which is present at an
individual and group level in the organisation. Knowledge is a cognitive, even a
physiological event, that takes place inside human mind (Nonaka and Takeuchi,
1995a).
2.2.2 Types of knowledge
Knowledge can be categorized as Tacit or Explicit (Nonaka and Takeuchi,
1995b). Explicit knowledge can be documented, categorized, transmitted, and
demonstrated. It can be accessed by other people even if the knowledge source
is absent explicit knowledge to know-that (Kogut and Zander, 1992; Hansen,

10
1999, Debowski, 2006) (example: material properties, technical information, tool
characteristics).
Tacit knowledge draws on the accumulated experience and learning of an
individual. It is hard to reproduce or share with others; tacit knowledge has been
linked to know-how (Kogut and Zander, 1992, Debowski, 2006) (example: problem
finding & solving in ACM projects, assembly procedure, tool settings, estimation of
process, machining and assembly timings).
According to Awad and Ghaziri (2004), tacit knowledge is knowledge embedded
in the human mind through experiences and jobs. In contrast, explicit knowledge
is knowledge codified and digitized in books, documents, reports, spreadsheets,
memos, training courses, e-mail, and the like. Thus, it is more difficult to retrieve
and transmit tacit knowledge as compared to explicit knowledge.
According to Debowski, there are 2 more kind of Knowledge: Codified and
Embodied. Codified knowledge: recorded and accessed through organisational
systems (Debowski, 2006) (example: ACM department procedures, machine and
assembly checklists). Embodied knowledge: held by individuals (Debowski, 2006)
(example: knowledge gained from projects and work experience, which held by engineers
and technicians).
2.2.3 Knowledge in project
KM in projects and project-based companies is also becoming a prerequisite to
sustain a competitive advantage (Love 2005). It is argued that without managing
knowledge in projects, knowledge assets can be lost when a project is
completed. This results in organisational knowledge fragmentation and loss of
organisational learning (Kotnour, 2000). However, in project-based companies
and projects in general, activities such as knowledge acquisition and sharing,
which are a part of Knowledge Management, are often very complex tasks. This
is due to the fact that project teams are often a set of diversely skilled people

11
working together over a limited period of time, and they often include members
who have never worked together before and who do not expect to work together
again (Dawes,1994).
According to Hall and Andriani (1999, 2002) knowledge which is new to a project
has to be either invented internally in the project or acquired from external
sources. This new knowledge may add to or substitute the project’s existing
knowledge base. Hall and Andriani categorise this new knowledge as either
additive or substitutive knowledge (Nooteboom, 1996). Referring to the project
type categorisation, it is possible to conclude that delivery and investment
projects use, by their nature, more additive than substitutive knowledge, and
Research & Development and design projects use, also by their very nature,
more substitutive than additive knowledge.
The project-based company is an organisation in which the majority of products
are made against custom-made designs for customers – the company’s mode of
production is dominated by projects. Production in project-based companies
takes place through project teams (Turner and Keegan, 1999). ACM (Auto
Components Manufactures) industries can be identified as project-based
company (Appendix A). Project-based organisations (Appendix C&D) are
temporary arrangement, emphasis on goals, dynamic, flexible, non-hierarchic,
decentralised decision-making and adhocratic (Anell and Wilson, 2002)
The project team is a group of people working together for a common goal- i.e
for project delivery. Knowledge sharing, problem solving and decision making are
some of the main activities of a project team. Project teams typically enjoy a
considerable amount of autonomy within the limits set (Lundin and Soderholm,
1995). Briner (1990) divide the project team membership into visible team
members that are part of the organisation but not permanently in the project, and
invisible team members that are stakeholders in the project while non-members
of the organisation. In ACM project visible team members are factory manager and

12
department heads, they are part project team, regularly involve, but not dedicated
completely to project (Appendix B). The invisible team members are sub-
contractors and suppliers under outsourcing & sub-contract department, but these
members are not part of organisation (Appendix A).
Project team building is the process of taking a collection of individuals with
different needs, background and expertise, and transforming them into an
integrated and effective work unit. Projects comprise individuals with different
competences, and different experience from other projects (Ruuska, 1999,
Tissen, 2000). In ACM projects Factory Manager performs project team building
process; he collects project team members and project engineer based on
project complexity and competence and experience of engineers and
technicians. The project engineer is selected based on project area of expertise
or major area of project activities (different departments) (Appendix B).
2.3 Knowledge- related project work environments
According to Koskinen (2004), with the help of identification of ‘knowledge gap’
between the existing knowledge base that is acquired by the project team, it is
possible to identify different knowledge-related project work environments. The
discussion in the following describes four different knowledge-related project
work environments that illustrate circumstances and situations where Knowledge
Management processes can take place in a project work context (Figure2.1 and
2.2)

Gnanamoorthy Gowri Shankar -N6211216
Figure 2.1: Four knowledge
(Source: Koskinen, 2004)
Figure 2.2: Knowledge-related projec
(Source: Stahle and Gronroos, 1999)
N6211216 BEN910
: Four knowledge-related project work environments
related project work environments
(Source: Stahle and Gronroos, 1999)
BEN910 – Integrated Project
13

14
2.3.1 Mechanical project work environment (similar projects in ACM)
In a mechanical project work environment (Figure2.1 and 2.2) a team tries to
reach predetermined single-minded interpretations – i.e the utilisation of explicit
knowledge is abundant. Moreover, in a mechanical project work environment the
knowledge utilised is often an additive in its nature. Success in a mechanical
project work environment requires that the team members are skilled in adapting
instructions. The tasks are precisely defined and a large proportion of the
relevant knowledge is transferred in a written form – i.e utilisation of information
technology in knowledge transfer is usually abundant. In a mechanical project
work environment, knowledge moves from the project management to individual
team members. Strictly speaking, knowledge is sent not for discussion but only to
be obeyed. Because the knowledge in a mechanical project work environment is
in a great part in explicit form, it can be sent to the people involved over vast
distances. The mechanical project work environment fits in projects in which
quality criteria must be met precisely (Koskinen, 2004).
In ACM Similar or less complex projects the handling of knowledge is seen as the
processing of knowledge primarily in a written form, and every problematic
situation is met by more processing of knowledge. In these types of projects the
possibility of multiple interpretations is not usually taken into account. This means
that a new standardised project processing is a manifestation of explicit and
additive knowledge. The implementation of a standardised project processing
takes place in this environment, which is described here as a mechanical project
work environment (Appendix A).
2.3.2 Organic project work environment (new projects in ACM)
In an organic project work environment (Figure2.1 and 2.2) the ambiguity of
knowledge is significant. The tasks involve inconsistent situations, and the
changes that they produce and the challenges produced by circumstances do not
necessarily have immediate answers. In the organic project work environment
solutions to problems are directed by non-linear thinking (R&D projects).

15
Engineers act based on their extensive research, intuition and experience. The
elements of knowledge consist of the multidimensional knowledge stores of the
project participants, which means that knowledge is often created with the help of
face-to-face interactions (Project team meeting and monthly department heads
meeting).
Knowledge in an organic project work environment is frequently more difficult and
multidimensional than in a mechanical project work environment. A lot of the
knowledge and know-how of a project team is based on experience-based tacit
knowledge. Moreover, in an organic project work environment the knowledge that
is created is substitutive in its nature (Koskinen, 2004).
In ACM New and complex projects in a concept of manufacturing a new
prototype tool, the concept is in great part a manifestation of tacit and substitutive
knowledge. The concept creation may begin with team members discussing a
variety of personal experiences, but as it proceeds the expressions should
converge through the understanding of individuals into one concept that becomes
their common focus. The team members may apply creative techniques that
make their insights and experiences more explicit, helping to bundle them into
key words that finally form a concept. Crystallisation of the concept is achieved
when all the team members feel that the concept corresponds with that they
know tacitly. The implementation of a product development project takes place in
the environment which is described here as an organic project work environment.
In ACM projects the R&D engineers actively involve with department heads and
project teams for manufacturing a new prototype tool (Appendix A).
2.3.3 Semi-mechanical and semi-organic project work environment
Semi-mechanical and semi-organic project work environments (Figure 2.1 and
2.2) are probably the most prevalent. Knowledge is created with the help of face-
to face communication and information technology. However, the utilisation of
information technology in knowledge creation and utilisation is more abundant in
the semi-mechanical project work environment than in semi- organic project work

16
environment, and face-to-face interaction-based knowledge creation and
utilisation is more abundant in the semi- organic project work environment than in
the semi-mechanical project work environment.
In ACM projects semi-mechanic and semi-organic project work environment will
be selected based on project complexity and process and technology involved in
project.
2.4 Elaboration of Problem Statement
There are a lot of factors which are related to KM in the ACM organisation. The
factors can be broadly classified as
• Factors which drive the ACM organisation to implement KM.
• ACM Organisational elements as factors.
• Factors affecting the knowledge sharing in an organisation/a project work.
• Knowledge creation and its issues.
2.4.1 Factors which drive the ACM organisation to implement KM
The following are the critical factors which are driving the managements to
implement KM in their organisations. KM gives the following advantages to the
organisations
• Enhanced decision making skills (Problem finding, prediction and
anticipation).
• Improved problem solving ability and avoiding repeating mistakes.
• Increase in employee competence.
According to Leonard-Barton and Sensiper (1998), there are three main ways in
which tacit knowledge can be potentially exercised to the benefit of the
organisation.
Problem solving: The most common application of tacit knowledge is for
problem solving. The reason experts (project engineers) on a given subject can

17
solve a problem more readily than novices is that the experts have in mind a
pattern borne of experience (learning from pervious projects), which they can
overlay on a particular problem and use to quickly detect a solution. The expert
(project engineers) recognises not only the situation in which he finds himself, but
also what action might be appropriate for dealing with the situation. The project
engineers are responsible for problem solving in ACM projects.
Problem finding: A second application of tacit knowledge is to the framing of
problems. Some researchers distinguish between problem solving and problem
finding. Problem solving is linked to a relatively clearly formulated problem within
an accepted paradigm. Problem finding, on the other hand, tends to confront the
person the person with a general sense of intellectual unease, leading to a
search for better ways of defining or framing the problem. Creative problem
framing allows the rejection of the obvious or usual answers to a problem in
favour of asking a wholly different question. In ACM projects project team and
project engineer having a meeting to find potential project problems at design
stage.
Predication and anticipation: The deep study of a project seems to provide an
understanding, only partially conscious, of how something works, allowing an
individual to anticipate and predict occurrences that are subsequently explored
very consciously. Historical events for pervious projects and project problems
highlight these kinds of anticipation and reliance on inexplicable mental process
can be very important in invention. Risk assessment, estimation and planning
functions can be related to this process.
Employee competence: Balasubramanian (1999) define KM as an
‘organisational capability that allows people in organisations, working as
individuals or in teams, projects or other such communities of interest, to create,
capture, share and leverage their collective knowledge to improve
competitiveness and performance’. Increasing the employee’s competence has a

18
direct outcome on the financial results of the company. Hansen (1999) has
identified two broad approaches to the management of knowledge in
organisations, viz., the personalisation approach and the codification approach.
The personalisation approach would include face-to-face communication,
communication through structures such as networks of people, cross-functional
teams, committees, task forces, training and development, internal knowledge
sharing through benchmarking and job rotation, and creating of strategic
alliances. The codification approach refers to the technological route for KM and
would include the setting up of databases, data warehouses, decision support
systems, Enterprise Resource Planning systems, and electronic networks for
communication and sharing knowledge (Lakshman and Parente, 2008).
2.4.2 Organisational elements as factors
Some of the elements of the Organisation/Project like Top management,
individual project team member and the organisation knowledge will act as
factors which potentially influence KM in an organisation. The influence of these
factors are discussed below;
Individual project team member
The focus here is about obtaining knowledge from individual competence, skills
and knowledge for successful project completion. ‘Project team member’
primarily means a knowledge worker, whose skills and expertise are the
foundations of successful project implementation (Drucker, 1993). Thus, in the
case of an individual project team member ‘knowledge is the individual ability to
draw distinctions within a collective domain of action, based on an appreciation of
context or theory, or both (Tsoukas and Vladimirou, 2001). This means that an
individual team member’s capacity to exercise judgement is based on an
appreciation of context in the ethno-methodological, that a social being is
knowledgeable in accomplishing a routine and taken-for-granted task within a
particular context as a result of having been through processes of socialisation.

Within a well-functioning project implementation, the knowledge of an individual
team member is transf
central function of the project: knowledge moves efficiently within the project,
allowing everyone to know about other
common basis for discussions between different
project team the knowledge of individuals transfor
uncodified routines, and written explicit knowledge (
according to Otala (1996) in an ideal case knowledge moves freely
project and is refined through common interpretation. This common interpretation
can be developed by improving conversational and interpersonal skills as well as
taking into consideration various interpretations and perspectives within a project.
An individual’s personal competence in a project implementation and/ or in a
project-based company context as a whole includes the mastery of a body of job
related knowledge and skills (which can be technical, professional, or
managerial) and also the mot
knowledge to others (Spencer and Spencer, 1993:73). Acquisition and sharing of
competencies depend on motivation as much as on technical knowledge
involved. According to Spencer
individual’s competence are crucial in transforming knowledge and skills into
effective project results.
Figure 2.3: Transformation of individual team member’s knowledge into project knowledge
(Source: Tsoukas and Vladimirou, 2001)
N6211216 BEN910
functioning project implementation, the knowledge of an individual
team member is transformed into knowledge of the project. This is the most
allowing everyone to know about other’s problems and ideas. In this way, a
common basis for discussions between different individuals is created. Among a
project team the knowledge of individuals transform into shared understanding,
odified routines, and written explicit knowledge (Figure 2.
according to Otala (1996) in an ideal case knowledge moves freely
based company context as a whole includes the mastery of a body of job
managerial) and also the motivation to expand use and distribute work
involved. According to Spencer and Spencer (1993), these two aspects of an
effective project results.
: Transformation of individual team member’s knowledge into project knowledge
as and Vladimirou, 2001)
19
functioning project implementation, the knowledge of an individual
ormed into knowledge of the project. This is the most
problems and ideas. In this way, a
individuals is created. Among a
m into shared understanding,
Figure 2.3). Furthermore,
according to Otala (1996) in an ideal case knowledge moves freely within a
based company context as a whole includes the mastery of a body of job-
ivation to expand use and distribute work- related
wo aspects of an
: Transformation of individual team member’s knowledge into project knowledge

It is also important to understand that the performance of individuals varies over
time. This means that person’s competencies evolve in the course of their lives
as they cumulate new meanings into their worldview, which are shapi
performances, too. The
competence of an engineer has changed in the course of his working life. The
explicit technological knowledge that an engineer has gained in his or her formal
education has transformed into diverse tacit knowledge, like work
how, relationships between people, business skills, etc.
Figure 2.4: Competence transformation of an engineer in the project/working life
(Source: Koskinen and Pihlanto, 2006)
The competencies of senior
based and include a lot of tacit knowledge. This is because senior personnel
have had many chances to work in different contexts and situations, and they
therefore also had chances to collect experiences that have become their tacit
knowledge. This means, as said above, that the explicit knowledge which a
project engineer has gained being as a junior in a university has transformed in
the corse of his lifetime into
The traditional way to categorise knowledge is make a distinction between data,
information and knowledge. However, here we understood these terms by
N6211216 BEN910
as they cumulate new meanings into their worldview, which are shapi
performances, too. The Figure 2.4 below illustrates, in principle, how the
transformed into diverse tacit knowledge, like work
how, relationships between people, business skills, etc.
: Competence transformation of an engineer in the project/working life
nd Pihlanto, 2006)
The competencies of senior –level project team members are often socially
e also had chances to collect experiences that have become their tacit
the corse of his lifetime into diverse tacit skills.
20
as they cumulate new meanings into their worldview, which are shaping their
illustrates, in principle, how the
transformed into diverse tacit knowledge, like work-related know-
: Competence transformation of an engineer in the project/working life
level project team members are often socially
e also had chances to collect experiences that have become their tacit

stressing the human dimension
an interpretation process and knowledge is analytical judgement
Furthermore, we put the emphasis on a categorisation according to which
knowledge is divided into tacit and explicit knowledge. In many cases within the
project work tacit knowl
typically transferred between team members through face
Organisational knowledge
Organisational knowledge is the set of collective understanding embedded in an
organisation – in a project team and project
put its resources to particular uses (Bohn, 1994)
Figure 2.5: Knowledge application in ACM Projects
(Source: Bohn, 1994)
All the knowledge needed in
Figure 2.5. The end of
lines are the main activities that affect the outcome of the project.
and department also have main activities and sub
N6211216 BEN910
stressing the human dimension – i.e that data are raw knowledge, information is
interpretation process and knowledge is analytical judgement
project work tacit knowledge is seen as the most important knowledge that is
typically transferred between team members through face-to-face interaction.
Organisational knowledge
roject team and project-based company – which enables it to
ts resources to particular uses (Bohn, 1994)
nowledge application in ACM Projects
All the knowledge needed in an ACM project implementation is visualised by the
end of darker centre line describes the project output. The
are the main activities that affect the outcome of the project.
and department also have main activities and sub-activities
21
i.e that data are raw knowledge, information is
interpretation process and knowledge is analytical judgement of an individual.
edge is seen as the most important knowledge that is
face interaction.
which enables it to
ect implementation is visualised by the
describes the project output. The light
are the main activities that affect the outcome of the project. Each process
tivities (Main activity-

22
Component testing; Sub-activity for Component testing -first sample, plot run, customer
sample approval) and also the project main activities (Design approval from
customer, Cost estimation) and its sub-activities (sub-contract works, supplier works,
standard part purchases) collection of all project and process main and sub-
activities determines the outcome of the project. Black (darker) line represents
tacit knowledge; Blue (lighter) represents explicit knowledge. The length of each
branch represents the activity’s relative extent to the project. With the help of this
Figure 2.5 it is possible to realise that a project may need many types of
knowledge and that the Knowledge Management methods needed in a project
implementation are often versatile. For example, a small sub-activity, where
implementation needs utilisation of rare tacit knowledge, may crucially render the
outcome of a project.
Top management – attitude and support
Top management is a critical success factor in project-based firms. A study
covering both macro and micro aspects of KM in Indian ACM firms finds that for
successful KM initiatives, the active involvement and support of top management
is one of the most crucial prerequisites (Pillania, 2006). Management leadership
and support is one of the 11 critical success factors (CSF) for implementing KM
in Engineering firms (Wong, 2005). Leadership plays a critical role in a
company’s KM efforts (DeTienne 2004). Leadership has an ionizing role, as it
generates and sets the direction for energy in an organisation (Lloyd & Stewart,
2002). Rajat Gupta, McKinsey’s Managing Director, initiated a strong personal
involvement and investment to make sure his company took on knowledge
development efforts (Singh, 2001).
Leaders should determine what knowledge is valuable for the firm in the first
place and then determine how best to distribute knowledge (DeTienne, 2004).
Top managers must strategically decide which KM efforts to support and develop
and then must follow that strategy (Takeuchi, 2001). Leadership plays an
important role in creating and communicating the knowledge vision of the

23
company, facilitating and utilising the shared space effectively, and
understanding the knowledge assets of the firm in order to facilitate the
knowledge-creating process (Nonaka, 2002). Top managers must articulate a
‘grand theory’ of what the company as a whole ought to be (Takeuchi, 2001).
Asking the right questions and the ability to listen to answers and apply the
knowledge gained are vital aspects of a leadership role. Leadership needs to
bring the knowledge issues to the surface and then make sure they are included
in board discussions about strategy (Lloyd & Stewart, 2002). Top management
must incorporate its vision for KM into the company’s corporate objectives or
policy statement (Takeuchi, 2001).
Rajat Gupta stresses that when he started as managing director, one of the most
important things he emphasized was making sure they were in the forefront of
knowledge (Singh, 2001). Management responsibilities in the KM process include
motivating employees; providing equal opportunities and development; and
measuring and rewarding the performance, behaviours and attitudes that are
required for effective KM (Beckman, 1999). Leadership styles that involve human
interaction and encourage participative decision-making processes are positively
related to the skills and traits that are essential to KM (Politis, 2001).
2.4.3 Factors affecting knowledge sharing in an organisation
There are numerous factors that either advance or weaken knowledge sharing
possibilities in a project work context. The following sub-sectors describe factors:
which are highly related to ACM projects.
Project leadership
Leadership in a project that creates new knowledge is largely a matter of giving
people creative freedom within a framework devised by the leader. To do that,
the leader must know enough about the field of specialisation to be equipped to

24
judge performance in relation to context. Furthermore, the members of a project
team can succeed only if its leader is aware that the height of his personal
aspiration will determine the quality of the products/ services the project creates.
In the case of new task, the project manager works at developing what Boam and
Sparrow (1992) have termed ‘transitional competencies’. The need for
transitional competencies arises when people are given tasks they are unfamiliar
with, and fraught with conflict, stress, or uncertainty. Under the guidance of a
project manager who has some experience of the task at hand, a team member
can go through a learning process in which she or he creates the explicit and
tacit knowledge required to accomplish the task.
Motivation
Motivation is an internal psychological process, which states, reinforces, directs
and supports goal-directed behaviour. In engineering projects the question is
often how to get people interested in projects and involved in project processes.
Motivation generally means how to keep a person’s interest and how to keep him
going despite difficulties (Buchanan and Huczynski, 1997).
Osterloh and Frey (2000) make a distinction between extrinsic (financial rewards;
for example a percentage of project value is given team members after finishing
project within project evaluation parameters time, cost and quality) and intrinsic
(undertaken for one’s need for satisfaction; for example employee of the year,
outstanding technician award) motivational approaches. They argue that intrinsic
motivations are crucial when tacit knowledge is to be transferred between teams
and team members, as explicit motivations are unlikely to work because the
transfer of tacit knowledge cannot easily be observed or attributed to an
individual. They propose that the tendency to hoard knowledge will be reduced if
control mechanisms match the nature of the task and motivational factors.
Intrinsic motivation is a key driver of knowledge sharing. Extrinsic interventions,
such as rewards and evaluations, may even adversely affect knowledge sharing

25
motivation because they appear to redirect attention from ‘experimenting’ to
following the rules or technicalities of performing a specific task.
According to Barkley and Saylor (1994), motivation is the behaviour of an
individual whose energy is selectively directed toward a goal. Performance is the
result of having both the ability and the motivation to do a task. These authors
argue that motivation depends on satisfying the needs of individuals.
Traditionally, motivation was equated with extrinsic rewards such as
compensation, promotion, and additional benefits, and clothing (Maslow’s
hierarchy of need, Maslow 1943). ‘Today, people need to be motivated by a
higher order of needs, such as a sense of belonging, a feeling of
accomplishment, improved self-esteem, and opportunities for personal growth’
(Barkley and Saylor, 1994:191).
‘Knowledge is power’ is a well-known line to describe situations where people
with rare knowledge have the highest reputation of knowledge sharing. Ego can
play in important role in the knowledge sharing process (Brown and Starkey,
2000). According to Davenport and Prusak (1998), especially in situations where
job security is low, knowledge as a power base becomes vital for an individual,
and private knowledge may be even as a kind of insurance against losing a job.
In ACM projects these kinds of issues will occur in between project engineers.
People rarely give away something without expecting anything in return. Hall
(2003) argues that knowledge is a private commodity and it is up to the owner to
decide whether to share it or not. Thus, to entice project team members to share
their knowledge as part of a social exchange transaction they need to be
persuaded it is worth doing so. The stakeholders in a project work context expect
mutual reciprocity that justifies the expense in terms of time and energy spent
sharing their knowledge.
A lack of motivation to actively share knowledge across project boundaries leads
to less than optimal project performances. Such lack of sharing impedes the

26
optimal development of projects (Pinto and Onsrud, 1995), and also hinders the
development and utilisation of a project technology’s full potential (Frank, 1992).
Such impediments to sharing are both technological and cultural in nature, with
the latter often being harder to overcome.
In ACM organisation can introduce management activities like 5S, Quality circle,
Total quality management (TQM) which will promote exchange of knowledge
among engineers and technicians. Members involved in such activities can be
given financial rewards and free company sponsored external training.
In ACM projects, project engineers and project team members often compete
directly with each other through their special knowledge and talents (Disterer,
2001). It may be part of the individual culture of high-performing employees that
they voluntarily enter into competition for scare seats on a career path (Project
engineer: only few positions available in ACM organisation) because they like to
compete and to excel on principle (Quinn, 1996). But the drawback of such
competition is obvious: people are very cautions to share their knowledge openly
with colleagues, because they will possibly give up an individual edge. In these
cases competition and the corresponding incentives and rewards often urge
people to build a unique expertise in a certain area, and in order to prove that
expertise – e.g relations to clients or whom to ask to solve problems- they do not
share it with colleagues.
Transferring knowledge may also be seen as an additional chore because
communication takes time (Disterer, 2001). Some individuals may not expect any
reciprocal benefit from transferring their knowledge because they do not believe
in this benefit or they do not experience it necessary. Even if individuals do
expect a payback for their contributions, an answer to the natural question ‘what
is in it for me?’ is often not clear for those people who suffer from a lack of
motivation. According to Quinn (1996), there is a need for employees to have

27
some self-motivated creativity and some sense of ‘care-why’ in order to foster
knowledge sharing.
Summing up, to achieve successful knowledge sharing, projects and ACM
companies need to convince people to reject the old-fashioned way of thinking
that they are being measured by what they know and do individually. Such
thinking only perpetuates knowledge hoarding and the development of
‘knowledge repositories’ from which little value- adding transfer takes place. One
way by which this can be achieved to build conscious knowledge sharing practice
into daily work process such as performance appraisal (Robertson ad
Hammersely, 2000; McDermott and O’Dell, 2001). Reward and appraisal
systems can encourage people to participate in knowledge sharing activities in a
way that it can be seen to be valued by the company. They can reinforce and
convey the desired culture by providing tangible evidence of what it values. The
efforts of the company to reward those individuals and teams who share their
knowledge in a spirit of collaboration and innovation are therefore congruent with
creating the type of learning organisation. The concurrent emphasis on rewarding
project team performance rather than just the excellence of the individual is also
supportive in a project work context (Thomas, A.J, Barton. R, and John,
E.G, 2008)
Example for a team based performance appraisal will be employees get a
percentage (5-10%) of company turnover (total business in dollars) in this every
project team and other team members will share knowledge for company
productivity and profits.
Knowledge-based trust
Most organisational relationships are rooted in knowledge-based trust (a ‘thick’
form of trust) (Shapiro1992; Lewicki and Bunker, 1996). That is, trust is based on
the behavioural predictability that comes from the history of interaction. It exists
when an individual has adequate knowledge about someone to understand his

28
well enough to be able to predict considerably accurately his behaviour.
According to Shapiro (1992; 369), mutual trust results from predictability, for it
produces a ‘Self-fulfilling prophecy’ effect. People often act co-operatively
towards those they expect to be co-operative, and this action encourages the
receivers of co-operative gestures to reciprocate in kind. This kind knowledge
trust can developed in ACM companies in between engineers and technicians
who come from same universities, same language and region.
The repair of violated knowledge-based trust is problematic, because the
violation presents a direct threat to the victim’s self image and self-esteem.
According to Lewicki and Bunker (1996), violation of knowledge-based trust
suggests that the victim has been very wrong about the violator (i.e he does not
know that person as well as he previously thought). This kind of situation occur in
ACM Company, when many people are competing for few top-level positions
(only few project engineer positions available)
Organisational culture and Project culture
Since the final product of a delivery consists of the work of several experts in
various fields, the cultures of the basic organisation and of the various
professional groups meet. Different professions (different department engineers
and technicians) typically have their own cultures and ways of working that are
not necessarily in harmony with the rules of the project (Ruuska, 1999). When
various cultures are effectively joined, the result is a project organisation that is
able to mediate the message widely and get everyone working for a common
goal. A good project culture therefore requires a directing whole which consists of
an organisational culture and a strong professional culture (Figure 2.6) in ACM
projects factory manager or top-level management should not even attempt to
unite the various professional cultures but rather seek appropriate modes of co-
operation and communication for the project at hand.

Figure 2.6: ACM Project culture
(Source: Ruuska, 1999)
In the opinion of Brown and Eisenhardt (1997), culture is important in
encouraging team members to share kn
successful project organisations appear to be good places to work and share
knowledge. In these types of atmospheres interpersonal communication tends to
be non-problematic. Furthermore, the basic challenge in project organi
may not be the transfer to tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge, but the
‘bumping up’ of knowledge one level so that it becomes part of the decision
making process of the project team and project
Attitude
The attitudes of people
1998) in their life. They are a learned predisposition to act in a favourable or
unfavourable manner in a given circumstance and situation, and involve
evaluations based on individual’s feelings. Accor
attitudes are more enduring than opinions and have an impact on individual’s
motivation. They can result in prejudices and stereotypes, such as the negative
attitudes towards projects’ ‘after
N6211216 BEN910
culture
encouraging team members to share knowledge and, according to them,
problematic. Furthermore, the basic challenge in project organi
making process of the project team and project-based company.
The attitudes of people connect their beliefs and values with feelings (Brown,
They are a learned predisposition to act in a favourable or
evaluations based on individual’s feelings. According to Jashapara (2004),
attitudes towards projects’ ‘after-action reviews’. All these complicated
29
owledge and, according to them,
problematic. Furthermore, the basic challenge in project organisations
based company.
connect their beliefs and values with feelings (Brown,
They are a learned predisposition to act in a favourable or
ding to Jashapara (2004),
action reviews’. All these complicated processes

30
are realised in the worldviews of project team members in terms of dynamics
between different kinds of meanings.
Assumptions
Basic assumptions are the taken-for-granted solutions to particular problems
(Brown, 1998). They are the ‘theories-in-use (Argyris and Schon, 1978) that
perpetuate organisational routines and single-loop learning. Assumptions are
unconsciously held, making them difficult to confront or make explicit. They are
highly complex interpretations based on individual’s beliefs, values and emotions.
One typology of basic assumptions considers five dimensions (Schein, 1985):
• Whether an organisation dominates the external environment or is
dominated by it
• Whether truth and reality are received dogma, rules and procedures, a
consequence of debate, or ‘what works’
• Whether people are inherently lazy or self-motivated
• Whether ‘doing’ and work are more primary than ‘being and valuing
employees’ private lives’
• Whether human interaction is based on individualism or collectivism
In the opinion of Flannes and Levin (2001), many project team members join a
new project team with a certain amount of ‘baggage’ located in their worldview.
Such baggage can be feelings, attitudes, beliefs, assumptions, or expectations
that have a negative tone and are the result of pervious negative personal or
professional experiences of the team member. In essence, the baggage
becomes an impediment to the team member’s active, positive engagement with
the work of the current team. The residual feeling that make up a person’s
baggage become a ‘chip on the shoulder’ that can hinder the team member’s
learning and knowledge sharing. Sources of baggage are located in people’s
worldviews and include;
• Previous or ongoing organisational problems, such as reductions in the
work force

• Industry changes
• Health issues
• Career stalling
• Personal problems
2.4.4 Knowledge creation and its issues
Knowledge creation is critical. According to (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995),
creating new knowledge and making it available to others is a central activi
organisations, and is the defining characteristic of the phenomenon of Knowledge
Management. Hirchheim, Klein and Lyytinen (1995)
knowledge creation process from codes to wisdom. The key challenges for
knowledge-intensive engineering firms are the identification, capture, storing,
mapping, dissemination and creation of knowledge from different perspectives
and for different purposes. It is found that managing knowledge assets in
engineering firms is not easy. It is an integr
which has culture, people, finance, technology and organisational structures at its
core (Egbu 2005).
Figure 2.7: Knowledge creation process
(Source: Hirchheim, Klein & Lyytinen, 1995)
N6211216 BEN910
Industry changes
Personal problems
Knowledge creation and its issues
creating new knowledge and making it available to others is a central activi
Management. Hirchheim, Klein and Lyytinen (1995) Figure 2.7
ngineering firms are the identification, capture, storing,
engineering firms is not easy. It is an integrated and complex social process,
: Knowledge creation process
(Source: Hirchheim, Klein & Lyytinen, 1995)
31
creating new knowledge and making it available to others is a central activity for
2.7 illustrate the
ngineering firms are the identification, capture, storing,
ated and complex social process,

32
Research study finds strong links between innovation, sales growth and a
preference for: expanding R&D, pursuing incremental process change, new
product development, and finding new export markets (Bagchi-Sen, 2001).
“Innovators” are more likely to experience growth than non innovators (Freel,
2000). Engineering firms enhance their performance and competitive advantage
by a more conscious and systematic approach to Knowledge Management
(Salojarvi, 2005).
Problems in knowledge creation
The main constraints are customer dependency, skills and knowledge acquisition
through training, poor learning attitude and networking because of their tradition
of being insular and autonomous (Laforet and Tann, 2006). There are significant
blockages to knowledge creation and use stemming from relational and
managerial rather than technical ignorance. Successful knowledge integration
between partners is considered as a function both of product “clockspeed” and
ability of managers to unlearn (Beecham and Cordey-Hayes, 1998). Engineering
firms really suffer with respect to resources is in the area of short-term financing
to enable them to absorb high-risks associated with innovation. Suggest
government and financial institutions focus on enhancing this specific provision
(Julien , 1996).
The attitude towards new knowledge creations is a problem as new knowledge
creation is viewed primarily the job of research and development department.
Also the processes for contributing new knowledge are not streamlined in the
organisation and employees are not aware of it (Pillania, 2005). This work is
focused on big firms. The literature review highlights the importance of
knowledge creation and categorisation and related issues.
2.4.5 IT systems are not KM
From the KM point of view, neither high investments in technology nor high
numbers of hardware and software in a firm are by themselves/per se features
which spell value addition for a firm. In order to make a contribution to the

33
company, the employees in an organisation should have the ability to use the
systems to interpret the results, to convert them into knowledge and to use them
in their work (Fitz-enz, 2001). Therefore, atmosphere should be created whereby
employees share knowledge or information by using communication channels in
an organisation. Working conditions, team working, eagerness to share
knowledge, free expression of opinion can be defined as the main
contribution/inputs of the organisational culture to KM (Bozbura, 2007). The
combination of three elements, that is, people, process and technology reveals
the most crucial factors involved in capturing, disseminating and sharing
knowledge. In order to explore the benefits of knowledge sharing all the three
elements, viz. people, process and technology need to be balanced for the better
working of any organisation. To consider only people and process and neglect
technology will fail to capitalize on IT which enhances the sharing of explicit
knowledge and makes it more widely available. On the other hand, ignoring
people and just focusing on process and technology will lead to resistance to
make any kind of change in the organisation. Finally, to focus only on people and
technology without process runs the risk of the past being automated (Gillingham
and Roberts, 2006).
2.5 Summary of literature review
From the study, the critical factors which can potentially influence KM in an
organisation are identified. The identified factors can be broadly classified as
flows
• Factors affecting the benefits of KM in ACM.
• Factors of the ACM Organisation.
• Factors affecting the Knowledge Sharing in an ACM organisation.
• Factors affecting the Knowledge Creation in ACM.

34
3 Research Methodology
3.1 Research approach
Survey method was used for the research study .survey was method chosen
because it is appropriate method for capturing the industry views and it is also
easy to respond. Survey was conducted namely with industrial experts in Auto
Components Manufacturers (ACM). Industrial experts were asked to give their
views on Knowledge Management KM in ACM. This survey provided an industry
wide macro and micro perspective of KM in ACM. Industrial experts were mostly
from the engineering background with engineering education qualifications and
also have relevant work experience in ACM.
3.2 Research instrument
Structured questionnaire was developed and used for the research purpose. The
questionnaire was pre-tested for checking any bias and was also discussed with
project supervisor. The questionnaire was administered to industrial experts in
various departments related to the clusters/industry/academic, of ACM.
3.3 Contact method
The questionnaires were sent via emails. The emails is sent to around 40-50
industrial experts and around 30 industrial experts responded for this survey.
Most of industrial experts were working in the middle level management in ACM
organisations.
3.4 Data analysis
The data so collected were analysed with appropriate statistical measures.

35
.
Figure 3.1: Survey result of Ques: 1
The majority of industry professionals responded that the KM in their organisation
is at introduction stage. The keys highlight of this survey (Figure 3.1) are number
of responses for KM at growth stage and zero responses for not in existence,
which shows now most or all of the ACM companies understand the importance
of KM. Also more than 80% for industry experts recognise knowledge as a part of
their asset base. Since the ACM industry is now moving more towards into
customised products, which creates a huge demand for knowledge economy
rather than production economy based on previous ACM market structure, where
the number of products was less in market, more importance was given for mass
production.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Not in existence at
all
Nascent or Budding
stage
Introduction stage Growth stage

36
Figure 3.2 shows that industry experts have lack of information about KM
process and tools. Lack of motivation creates poor sharing of knowledge in the
organisation and in projects, which is also supported in literature review section
(factors affecting sharing). Other huge problem is key employee leaving
organisation or projects, in case of ACM projects the project team members are
work on project for shorter duration, so it is difficult to identify main knowledge
resources and capturing them. Since most of KM in ACM companies in
introduction stage and budding stage the information overload and reinventing
the wheel issues are likely to affect the KM.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Lack of Information Information
overload
Reinventing the
wheel
Loss of crucial
knowledge due to
a key employee
leaving the
organisation
Poor sharing of
knowledge in the
organisation

37
Some of the responds KM is implenmented in some other name like Total quality
management(where major project issues are identified and solutions are
created), Quality circle (where a team of experts join together identifies and
solves a major problem or a process which need improvement in organisations
and projects), 5S,ISO (where process and daliy funtioning are documented).
Figure 3.3 shows that about 60% of responds identifies KM is benefical to
organisation, but some them not able to identfiy full benefits of KM. Also 50% of
them recongises stored knowledge is important and it needs to be upadting
regularly. 90% respondents think that it takes more than week for an employee to
get the relevant knowledge in ACM.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Never heard of
it
Something
they are
already doing
but not under
the same name
It is just a
management
fad
It is strategic
part of their
business
Something that
could be
beneficial for
the
organisation

38
According to this survey (Figure 3.4) 60% believe that knowledge creation is
everybody job. Which also highlights knowledge need to be captured from all
levels of management and all employees (knowledge creation). 33% suggests
top management should take active interset and allocate resource and time for
KM. which is also supported in literature review section(Top mgt). Also this
survey suggests(60%) that senoir management identifies KM is very important
and it provides less support and it looses its interset (26%) after beginning stage.
this knid of attitude of senior management may be due to expected outcome may
not achieved from KM. Also in terms of finacincal value the knowledge may be
weighed as less or no importance and it is diificult to access knowledge
evaluation and knowledge value addition towards organisation and projects.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
It’s the job of R&D
department only
They view it as
everyone’s job and
everybody contributes
to it
Top management takes
active interest in it and
supports it
continuously
It’s part of our
organisational
philosophy & culture

39
Figure 3.5 shows that, Transfer of knowledge and best practices (46%) and
innvation and knowledge creation (40%) are the main startegies used by ACM for
KM. since this majoirty of survey responents were form engineering backgroud
they relates Km to above stratgies. Respondents from business or marketing
background will give more importance to sustomer-focused and also Km as
business strategy. Also in ACM companies engineering and marketing & sales
has viewed into different ways. KM in ACM should be different for engineering
and marketing & sales.
Less support to “Communities of Practice(CoP’s)” and unable to identity CoP’s in
ACM organisation highlights the importance of organisation culture, professional
and project culture in KM . Internet, Intranet and Automated Manufacturing are
the most common technologies that are implemented in ACM for KM. Only (9%)
from this survey ACM companies uses Knowledge management software, which
indicates most of ACM companies identifies, captures and stores knowledge
through their existing or simple systems.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
KM as a business
strategy
Transfer of
knowledge & best
practices
Customer focused
knowledge
Personal
responsibility for
knowledge
Innovation and
knowledge
creation

40
The survey responses (Figure 3.6), shows that lack of motivation and
recongistion from senoir management affects heavily in KM. In some ACM
organisations indididual knowledge is probally its competive advantage and its
possibly provides him job security so the individual is less likely to share
knowledge. Team-based rewards and recognition will pomote knowledge
sharing. Knowledge sharing activity should be provided with engough resource
and time so that everybody recongises importance of knowledge sharing.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Functional
silos
Lack of
participation
Not willing to
share
knowledge
Lack of trust Knowledge
sharing not a
part of daily
work
Lack of
training
Lack of
rewards/
recognition for
knowledge
sharing

41
Lack of training and lack of time to learn are the biggest problems in using IT for
KM. the biggest hurdle of KM in ACM is determining what kind of knowledge to
be managed & making it available, because it involves many people and it also
depends the each and everyone view towards knowledge capturing, storing and
sharing. A knowledge can be useful to one and useless information to other one.
Developing a knowledge sharing is culture is also very difficult to create in
organisations; a good knowledge sharing culture will change people’s behaviour
from knowledge hoarding to knowledge sharing (Figure 3.7).
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Changing
people’s
behaviour
from
knowledge
hoarding to
knowledge
sharing
Lack of
understanding
of KM and its
benefits
Determining
what kind of
knowledge to
be managed &
making it
available
Justifying the
use of scarce
resources for
KM
Lack of top
management
commitment
to KM
Overcoming
technological
limitations
Attracting &
retaining
talented
people

42
4 Limitations of Research project
Although carefully researched, documented and analyzed, this research project
is subject to some limitations. Industry expert’s input to questionnaire will depend
upon their exposure or understanding about knowledge management. Some
related technical and management person have less understanding about
knowledge management will have significant impact in this research project. Not
many literature articles available on Automobile Components Manufacturers
(ACM) industries, which creates a generalist approach in this research project,
even existing literatures available on ACM industries are based on bigger firms
like Toyota, Ford etc or a country based, like India, Japan, U.S.A. etc…The 30
responses survey may not give the whole picture of ACM industries and the
results depend upon the KM implementation in those 30 ACM industries.
5 Results and Discussions
Knowledge Management (KM) has assumed a key position in today’s business
scenario, characterized by drastic and sporadic changes. Knowledge sharing is
one of the core tasks whose application in Automobile Components
Manufacturers (ACM) cannot defer if they wish to maintain their competitive
position. There have been various initiatives by firms towards better adoption of
KM activities but companies especially ACMs are still weak in utilizing their
employees’ knowledge. The approach of this project was to assess the
implementation of KM practices in auto component companies. A total of 30 were
participated in the survey for this research project. Results show that companies
do not consider KM as a management fad; they acknowledge the fact that it is
beneficial in the current scenario. In majority of the companies surveyed in the
study, Internet/ Intranet emerged as the most extensively used method for
knowledge sharing, followed by automated manufacturing. The human resources
are the most important asset of the organisation, since they are the source of
ingenuity.
Knowledge and skills possessed by the employees of the organisation is
considered as one of the most critical elements affecting the work performance of

43
the company. However, only the existence of embedded knowledge is not
enough for a company’s good performance, the organisations need to create a
culture of sharing this knowledge. Even though they acknowledge the benefits of
KM, in practice the findings revealed that information was not openly shared.
According to experts, IT (Information Technology) tools are more in use in bigger
ACMs as compared to small and medium enterprise (SME) ACMs. A well
developed and aligned KM strategy and active top management participation are
two of the key strategic issues in KM. The studies on KM strategy and the role of
top management have mainly focused on big firms. The requirements and
resources of SMEs are different from big firms. The major problems with IT for
KM are lack of time to learn, everyday use did not integrate into normal working
practice and lack of training. These findings reflect that important factors that
need to be considered in the development of a KM system includes simplicity of
the technology, ease of use, suitability of user needs, relevance of knowledge
content and standardization of a knowledge structure
Without management support, proper training, leadership and committed efforts
to make tacit knowledge explicit, KM in ACM will be less or partial developed
phenomenon or system and it will demoralize project and organisation members.
To improve KM effectiveness KM duties can be included in job duties and
responsibilities and productive knowledge sharing can be measured in
performance appraisal and pay reviews. The manufacturers need to put efforts to
convert the implicit knowledge of the employees into explicit knowledge for all
organisational levels.
6 Conclusion
The manufacturers know that KM is critical for their production but still not given
the required importance to it. There are various factors affecting the KM in ACM
still to be addressed like less knowledge sharing by employees, lack of KM tools,

44
ignorance by top management, etc. These resulted in implementing KM in most
of the organisations in some forms but they are still in inefficient stage.
7 Recommendations for ACM organisations
Creating a knowledge culture is key successful factor in knowledge
management
Rewards and recognition plays a key role in knowledge sharing: so
appropriate methods need to be chosen
Identify the sources of explicit, tactic, codified and uncodified knowledge in
ACM projects and it should be analysed before implementing km in ACM
Need to a create collaborative work environment among project teams
Knowledge needs to be created from available engineering codes, data,
and information
Categorisation project work environment is important to obtain knowledge
from ACM projects
Top management attitude, interest and support highly affect the KM
effectiveness in ACM projects
Knowledge creation and sharing has to be nurtured by a set of enabling
conditions;(provide IT system, allocate time for KM for activities, provide
other resources like training, rewards etc)
KM duties should be included in job duties and responsibilities so that
productive knowledge sharing can be measured in performance appraisal
and pay reviews.

45
List of References
Abdo, S. Ahmed (2008), Tool engineering: Organisation and operation,
Manufacturing data series, American Society of Tool and Manufaturing engineers,
University of Wisconsin,Madison
Agustin P-Araos, Kevin D. Barber, J. Eduardo M-Hernandez, Steve E, 2007.
Designing a knowledge management tool to support knowledge sharing
networks, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Journal of Manufacturing Technology
Management, vol 18,2 pg 153-168 (accessed May 19, 2010)
Ajmal, M., and K. Koskinen. 2008. Knowledge Transfer in Project-Based
Organisations: An Organisational Culture Perspective. Project Management
Journal 39, no. 1, (March 1): 7-15
http://www.proquest.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/ (accessed May 11, 2010)
Anell,B.I and Wilson T.L(2002). Organising in two methods: on the merging of the
temporary and the permanent, in K. Sahlin- Anderson and A.soderholm (eds), Beyond
Project Management. Malmo:Liber
Argysis, C and Schon,D.A (1978) Organisational Learning: A Theory of action
Perspective. Reading, MA:Addison-Wesley
Awad, E. M and Ghaziri, H. M (2004). Knowledge Management, Upper sadle river,
Pearson-Prentice hall, New jersey
Bagchi-Sen, S. (2001), “Product innovation and competitive advantage in an area
of industrial decline: the Niagara region of Canada”, Technovation, Vol. 21 No. 1,
pg. 45-54
Balasubramanian P, Nochur K, Henderson J C and Kwan M M (1999),
“Managing Process Knowledge for Decision Support”, Decision Support Systems,
Vol. 27, November, pg. 145-162
Barkley, B.T and Saylor, J.H (1994). Customer-Driven Project
Management.Boston: Mcgraw-hill
Beecham, M. and Cordey-Hayes, M. (1998), “Partnering and knowledge transfer
in the UK motor industry”, Technovation, Vol. 18 No. 3, pg. 191-205
Boam,R and Sparrow,P.(1992). Designing and Achieving Competency. London: Mcgraw-
hill
Boam, R. Sparrow,P. (1992). Designing and achieving competency. London:
Mcgraw-hill
Bozbura F. Tunc (2007), “Knowledge Management Practices in Turkish SMEs”,
Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 20, No. 2, pg. 209- 221

46
Briner,W. Geddes,M and Hastings,C. (1990).Project Leadership. Aldershot:Gower
Brown, A. and Starkey,K. (2000). Organisational identity and learning: a
psychodynamic perspective. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), pg 102-120
Brown,S. and Eisenhardt,K.(1997). The art of continuous change: linking
complexity theory and time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organisations.
Administrative science quartley, 42, pp1-34
Buchanan,D. and Huczynski,A (1997). Organisational Behaviour: An introductory
text. London: Prentice hall
Davenport,T.H and Prusak,L. (1998). Working knowledge: how organisations
manage what they know. Boston: Harvard business school press
Dawes, R.M (1994). House of cards: Psychology and psychotherapy built on
myth. New York: Free press
Detienne K.B, Dyer . G, Hoopes. C and Harris. S (2004) Toward a model of
effective knowledge management and directions for future research: culture,
leadership, and CKOs. Journal of Leadership & Organisational Studies 10(4), pg 26–
43
Disterer,G. (2001). Individual and social barriers to knowledge transfer.
Proceedings of the thirty-fourth annual Hawaii international conference on system
sciences, Hawaii
Drucker,P.F (1993b). The new society of organisations, in R. Howard (ed), The
learning imperative: Managing people for continuous innovation. Cambridge. MA:
Harvard business review press
Egbu, C.O., Hari, S. and Renukappa, S.H. (2005), “Knowledge management for
sustainable competitiveness in small and medium surveying practices”, Structural
Survey, Vol. 23 No. 1, pg. 7-22
Fitz-enz J (2001), The ROI of Human Capital, American Management Association,
New York, USA
Flannes, S.W and Levin,G. (2001). People skills for project managers. Vienna:
Management concepts
Frank,A.U (1992).Telecommunication and GIS: opportunities and challenges, in
P.W. Newton, P.R.Zwart and M.E.Cavill (eds), Networking spatial information systems.
London: Belhaven, pg.235-250

47
Freel, M. (2000), “Do small innovating firms outperform non-innovators?”, Small
Business Economics, Vol. 14 No. 3, pg. 195-210
Gillingham Helen and Roberts Bob (2006), “Implementing Knowledge
Management: A Practical Approach”, Journal of Knowledge Management Practice,
Vol. 7, No. 1
Hall, H. (2003). Borrowed theory: applying exchange theories in information
science research. Library and information science research,25, pg287-306
Hall,R. and Andriani,P. (1999). Operationalising knowledge management
concepts: the development of a technique for sharing knowledge in new product
development projects. International journal of innovation management 3 (3), pg 307-
333
Hansen MT, Nohria N and Tierney T (1999), “What’s Your Strategy for Managing
Knowledge?”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 77, No. 2, pg. 106-118
Hansen, M.T. (1999), “The search-transfer problem: the role of weak ties in
sharing knowledge across organisation subunits”, Administrative Science Quarterly,
Vol. 44 No. 1, pg. 82-111
Hirschheim, R., Klein, H., and Lyytinen, K. (1995) Information Systems
Development and Data Modeling: Conceptual and Philosophical Foundations,
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, Chap. 2, 6, and 7
Jashapara, A (2004). Knowledge Management. An Integrated approach. Harlow:
Pearson education Ltd
Julien, P.A., Stpierre, J. and Beaudoin, R. (1996), “Innovation in small business,
new technologies and their financing – an overview of recent research”, Canadian
Journal of Administrative Sciences, Vol. 13 No. 2, pg. 332-46
Kogut, B. and Zander, U. (1992), “Knowledge of the firm, combative capabilities
and the replication of technology”, Organisation Science, Vol. 3 No. 3, pg. 383-97
Koskinen,K.U.(2004). Knowledge management to improve project
commmunication and implementation. Project management journal, 35(2), pg 13-19
Kotnour T (2000). Organisational learning practices in the project management
environment. International journal of quality and reliability management, 17, pg 393-
406
Laforet, S. and Tann, J. (2006), “Innovative characteristics of small
manufacturing firms”, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 13
No. 3, pg. 363-74

48
Lakshman C and Parente Ronaldo C (2008), “Supplier-Focused Knowledge
Management in the Automobile Industry and Its Implications for Product
Performance”, Journal of Management Studies, Blackwell Publishing Ltd., Vol. 45, No.
2, pg. 317-342
Leonard-Barton,D. and Sensiper, S.(1998).The role of tacit knowledge in group
innovation. California management review, 40(3), pg 112-132
Lewicki,R.J. and Bunker,B.B. (1996). Developing and manintaining trust in work
relationships, in R.M Kramer and T.R.Tyler (eds), Trust in organisations: Frontiers of
theory and research. Thousand oaks, CA:sage
Lloyd. B and Stewartta, (2002) Leadership and knowledge management.
Leadership & Organisational Development Journal 23(5/6), pg 288–292
Love P.E.D, Fong P.S.W and Irani Z (2005b). Buliding a learning organisation in
a project-based environment in Love P.E.D, Fong P.S.W and Irani Z .
Management of knowledge in Project Environments. Amsterdam: Elsevier
Lundin,R.A. and Soderholm,A.(1995). A theory of the temporary organisation.
Scandinavian journal of management, 11(4), pg 437-455
Maria P. Salmador Sanchez, and Angeles Palacios. M 2008. Knowledge-based
manufacturing enterprises: evidence from a case study. Journal of Manufacturing
Technology Management 19, no. 4, (May 20): 447-468.
Maslow,A.H.(1943). Preface to motivation theory. Pschosomatic medicine, 5, pg 85-
92
McDermott, R. and O’Dell,C. (2001). Overcoming cultural barriers to sharing
knowledge. Journal of knowledge management, 5(1), pg 76-85
Nonaka. I, Toyama. R and Konnon. N (2002) SECI, ba and leadership: a unified
model of dynamic knowledge creation. In Managing Knowledge: An Essential Reader
(Little. S, Quintas. P and Ray. T, Eds), pg 13–43, Open University and Sage Publication,
London
Nonaka, I and Takeuchi, H. (1995a). The knowledge-creating company. New
York: Oxford university press
Nonaka I and Takeuchi H (1995b), The Knowledge Creating Company: How
Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation, Oxford University Press,
New York

49
Nooteboom, B.(1996). Globalisation, learning and strategy. EMOT workshop.
Durham: University of Durham
Osterloh, M and Frey, B. (2000). Motivation, knowledge transfer, and
organisational forms. Organisation science, 11(5), pg 538-550
Otala,L.(1996). Benefit of Learning- Competitiveness in the change process.
Provoo:WSOY
Pillania, R.K. (2005), “IT strategy for knowledge management in Indian industry”,
Journal ofInformation and Knowledge Management (JIKM), Vol. 4 No. 3, pg. 32-43
Pillania, R.K. (2004), “State-of-art of knowledge management in Indian industry”,
Management and Change, Vol. 9 No. 1, pg. 41-7
Pinto,J.K and Onsrud, H.J (1995). Sharing geographic infromation across
organisational boundaries: a research framework, in H.J Onsurd and G. Rushton
(eds), Sharing geographic information. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for urban policy
research, pg 44-64
Politis J.D (2001) The relationship of various leadership styles to knowledge
management. Leadership & Organisational Development Journal 22(7/8), pg 354–365
Quinn,J.B, Anderson, P. and Finkelstein, S. (1996). Managing professional
intellect: making the most of the best. Harvard business review, 74(2), pg 71-80
Riege, A., and M. Zulpo. 2007. Knowledge Transfer Process Cycle: Between
Factory Floor and Middle Management. Australian Journal of
Management 32, no. 2, (December 1): 293-314.
http://www.proquest.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/ (accessed March 19, 2010)
Robertson, M and Hammersley, G.(2000). Knowledge management practices
within a knowledge-intensive firm: the significance of the people management
dimension. Journal of European industrial training, 24, pg 241-253
Ruuska,K.(1999). Project under control. Helsinki: Suomen Atk-kustannus Oy
Salojarvi, S., Furu, P. and Sveiby, K. (2005), “Knowledge management and
growth in Finnish SMEs”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 9 No. 2, pg. 103-22
Schein, E.H. (1985). How culture forms, develops and changes, in R.H. Kilmann,
M.J Saxton and R.Serpa(eds), Gaining control of the corporate culture. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass
Shapiro,D. Sheppard, B.H. and Cheraskin, L. (1992). Business on a handshake.
The negotiation journal, (8), pg 365-378

50
Shelda Debowski. (2006) Knowledge management, Milton, Qld.: John Wiley &
Sons Australia, ch 2
Singh. J (2001) McKinsey’s managing director Rajat Gupta on leading a
knowledge-based global consulting organisation. The Academy of Management
Executive 15(2), pg 34–44
Spencer, Jr, L.M and Spencer, S. (1993). Competence at work. Models for
superior performance. New York: John Wiley & Sons
Takeuchi. H (2001) Toward a universal management concept of knowledge, In
Managing Industrial Knowledge (Nonaka. I and Teece. D, Eds), pg 315–329, Sage
Publications, London
Thomas, A.J, Barton. R, and John, E.G, 2008. Advanced manufacturing
technology implementation :A review of benefits and a model for change. International
Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 57, no. 2, (February 15): 156-
176. http://www.proquest.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/ (accessed May 19, 2010)
Thomas R Cutler. 2006. Project-based manufacturers face challenges, find
success. Tooling & Production, December 1, 35-36.
http://www.proquest.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/ (accessed June 11, 2010)
Tissen, R., Andriessen, D. and Deprez,L.(2000). The knowledge dividend.
London: Prentice Hall
Tsoukas, H. and Vladimirou, E. (2001). What is organisational knowledge?
Journal of management studies, 38 (7), pg 973-993
Turner, J.R and Keegan, A. (1999). The management of operations in the
project- based organisation, in K.Artto, K.Kahkonen and K.Koskinen (eds), Managing
business by projects. Helsinki: Project management association Finland
Vesa Peltokorpi, and Emiko Tsuyuki. 2006. Knowledge governance in a
Japanese project-based organisation. Knowledge Management Research &
Practice, February 1, 36-45.
Wong K.Y (2005) Critical success factors for implementing knowledge
management in small and medium enterprises. Industrial Management, Data
Systems 105(3/4), pg 261–280
Yuri W. Ramirez, and Harry J. Steudel. 2008. Measuring knowledge work: the
knowledge work quantification framework. Journal of Intellectual
Capital 9, no. 4, (October 1): 564-584.

51
Cover Letter of Survey
May 18th, 2010
Dear Sir/Madam,
Application of Knowledge Management system in Project based
manufacturing industry (Auto Components Manufacturing)
There has been a considerable interest in Knowledge Management system in
Auto components manufacturing (ACM) industries in the recent past. We are
conducting a research to investigate the current status of the lean practices that
are implemented in the various organisations and its effectiveness. As a part of
this research we are sending out questionnaires to selected Auto components
manufacturing organisations. The major objectives and potential benefits of the
survey to be conducted are outlined below.
Objectives: The main objectives of this survey are:
To review the current status of Knowledge Management system that is
implemented in ACM
To make out the reasons for implementing/not implementing Knowledge
Management system in ACM
To identify the benefits from Knowledge Management system
Benefits: This research offers significant benefits to the participating
organisations in the following ways:
This research will recognise areas of current and future manufacturing
improvement activities and the participants will be given a copy of the
analysis of the survey results if requested
The results of the analysis will be used to provide practical advice to
manufacturing organisations in the form of guidelines and will be given to
the participants

52
We sincerely hope that you will participate in this proposed research and
complete and return the questionnaire to us. The responses provided in this
survey will be treated as strictly ‘private and confidential’ information. At no stage
will any of the information relating to specific organisations be divulged to third
parties. The survey will take about 10 to 15 minutes to complete. You can email
your response.
If you have any queries regarding this survey and ongoing research please
contact Gowri Shankar at gowrishankar.gnanamoorthy@student.qut.edu.au
Thank you for your consideration.
Gnanamoorthy Gowri Shankar Dr. Assoc Prof Bambang Trigunarsyah
Post Graduate Student Lecturer in Project Management, QUT

53
QUESTIONNAIRE
Name : _________________ Designation : __________________
Organisation : _________________
1. What is the current status of Knowledge Management in Auto Components Manufacturers
(ACM)?
a) Not in existence at all b) Nascent or Budding stage
c) Introduction stage d) Growth stage
2. Do ACM recognise knowledge as a part of their asset base?
a) Yes b) No c) Can’t say
3. What are the problems of ACM?
a) Lack of Information
b) Information overload
c) Reinventing the wheel
d) Loss of crucial knowledge due to a key employee leaving the organisation
e) Poor sharing of knowledge in the organisation
4. What do ACM think of Knowledge Management (KM)?
a) Never heard of it
b) Something they are already doing but not under the same name
c) It is just a management fad
d) It is strategic part of their business
e) Something that could be beneficial for the organisation
5. What do you think of stored knowledge in ACM?
a) It’s quite important, relevant and latest
b) It’s quite important, relevant but not updated regularly
c) It’s just trivial, a part of formalities and of no use
6. How much time does it take for an employee to get the relevant knowledge in ACM?
a) A few minutes c) A few days
b) A few hours d) Week or more
7. Which of the following best describes ACM with respect to new knowledge creation?

54
a) It’s the job of R&D department only
b) They view it as everyone’s job and everybody contributes to it
c) Top management takes active interest in it and supports it continuously
d) It’s part of our organisational philosophy & culture
8 Which one of the following strategy ACM use for KM?
a) KM as a business strategy
b) Transfer of knowledge & best practices
c) Customer focused knowledge
d) Personal responsibility for knowledge
e) Innovation and knowledge creation
9. What is the attitude of senior management with respect to KM in ACM?
a) Sees it as very important and provides full support
b) Sees it as very important but hardly supports it
c) Sees it as a waste and hardly bothers
d) Was very supportive in the beginning but now lost interest
10. Which of the following best describes ACM culture?
a) Their basic values & purpose emphasise on sharing of knowledge
b) They have an open, encouraging & supportive culture
c) They think knowledge management is each and everybody’s job and so everybody have
the best of knowledge
d) The prevailing notion is that the knowledge management is the task of a few designated
ones and there is no need for knowledge sharing
11. Do ACM actively create and support “Communities of Practice*(CoP’s)” in their
organisation?
a) Yes b) No c) Can’t say
* An informal, self-organising group of people in the organisation, brought together by common
interest who share expertise and solve problems together.
12. What are the biggest cultural barriers in knowledge management in ACM?
a) Functional silos
b) Lack of participation
c) Not willing to share knowledge
d) Lack of trust
e) Knowledge sharing not a part of daily work

An investigation into the critical factors involved in developing a Knowledge Management system in Project based manufacturing industries

An investigation into the critical factors involved in developing a Knowledge Management system in Project based manufacturing industries

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (19)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (7)

Similar to An investigation into the critical factors involved in developing a Knowledge Management system in Project based manufacturing industries

Similar to An investigation into the critical factors involved in developing a Knowledge Management system in Project based manufacturing industries (20)

An investigation into the critical factors involved in developing a Knowledge Management system in Project based manufacturing industries