AN ANALYSIS OF DAFF’S CULTURE

Every company has a unique organisational culture which stems from its beliefs and philosophy about how its affairs ought to be conducted (Storey, 2010). From the literature it is clear that KM is not just information management and organisations are not merely information processing machines but an entity that creates knowledge through action and interaction (Nonaka, Toyama & Konno, 2000). Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995 cited by Ray, 2010: 23) proposed a model of knowledge creation that consists of three elements, i.e. SECI, ba and knowledge assets, which have to interact with each other to

_____________________________________________________________________________

26

Figure 2.3 Knowledge creation framework (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995:72).

SECI is a spiral process that starts with the creative individual and spirals out to enroll a wider community of interaction (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995:72). Fundamental to the way Japanese companies manage knowledge is their company-as-family workplace ba culture where the autonomy of individual thoughts and actions is influenced by obligation to the collective. In this way new ideas can be captured directly from one person to another involving the four modes of knowledge conversion. The organisation is thus viewed as an entity that creates knowledge continuously through interaction with the environment as well as organisational member interaction with each other (Nonaka, et al., 2000). Each of the four modes of knowledge creation can be described as follows:

Socialisation is the process of acquiring knowledge on shared experiences, i.e. by spending time with someone (same environment), knowledge is distributed from one person to another. This is usually as a result of mentorship relationships, communities of practice and networking among employees within the organisation or with clients or

contractors or consultants (service providers). In DAFF the socialisation processes are limited to networking with clients, contractors or consultants. Mentoring relationships are not positively encouraged.

Externalisation is the process of expressing tacit knowledge, making it explicit, which thus allows it to be shared further forming a basis for new knowledge. Nonaka, et al., (2000) uses concept creation in new product development as an example of this conversion process and suggests the sequential use of metaphor, analogy and model.

Many employees in DAFF do not document their know-how and hence presents a threat die to the potential loss of this tacit knowing when the officials resigns or retires.

Combination is the process of producing more complex and systematic sets of explicit knowledge from the already explicit knowledge such that it is then distributed among members of the organisation in a manner that it can be understood, i.e. large-scale databases that facilitate information flow, which is then used to develop new knowledge collated from many sources. DAFF’s intranet only holds documents to support officials in administrative activities and holds no technical repository for core knowledge creation and sharing.

Internalisation is the process of absorbing that knowledge which has been made explicit and converting it into tacit knowledge within the individual, i.e. enriching their tacit

_____________________________________________________________________________

28

Furthermore, in a more diverse and self-serving setting such as DAFF, the type of philosophy suggested for ba to contribute toward the management of knowledge may not work.

It is only when a culture is observable that its usefulness can be realised. Hence in diagnosing effectively and understanding the schema of culture types in DAFF, otherwise unexplained behaviour patterns could be explained. The main forces that drive organisational culture can be depicted as a cultural web shown in figure 2.4 below (Johnson, 1992).

Figure 2.4 The cultural web (Johnson, 1992).

Rituals &

Routines

The Paradigm Stories &

Myths

Control Systems

Organisational Structures

Power Structures Symbols

Within DAFF the structural and control aspects are dominant which leads to the transactional leadership style and its consequent impact on KM as described in section 2.2 above. The diverse nature of the organisation also gives rise to diverse rituals and routines which are not conducive to a unifying culture such as the Japanese ba in which KM can thrive. Powerful symbols such as the portraits of the current administration adorn office walls and serve as constant reminders of who is in power and what their priorities are – again not fertile ground for an empowering culture which allows unconstrained growth of knowledge through innovation. Then rumours of the rift between the minister and her deputy keep surfacing within the organisational grapevine and occasionally in the press. Their opposing political ideology and the controversial issues (agricultural land ownership, restitution, empowerment, GMO’s, etc.) within DAFF’s arena give credence to these myths and stories. These could have a divisive effect on the employee body along political and racial lines. Initiatives emanating from the minister’s office are frequently regarded with scepticism and mistrust by either camp as the true motive for these are often linked to the rumoured rivalry. The net effect of all the above factors on the organisational culture is a decline in conditions conducive to KM.

Therefore in order to understand and diagnose DAFF’s culture, Cameron and Quinn’s (2006 cited by Suppiah and Sandhu, 2011) Competing Values Framework (CVF) will be used. The fundamental premise of CVF is that organisations can typically be diagnosed as having any one or a combination of four culture types: clan, adhocracy, market and

_____________________________________________________________________________

30

Clan culture: describes a usually friendly place to work where people share a lot about themselves. The culture is expressed in teamwork, employee involvement programmes, high employee commitment to the organisation and co-workers, and high corporate commitment to employees;

Adhocracy culture: describes a dynamic, entrepreneurial and creative workplace where employees are empowered. Risk taking is encouraged and effective leadership is visionary, innovative and risk-orientated.

Market culture: describes organisations that have a major focus to conduct transactions with other stakeholders to create competitive advantage. Competitiveness and productivity basically forms the foundation of market culture driven organisations where winning is everything. Here knowledge becomes a proxy for power and this destabilises knowledge sharing.

Hierarchy culture: describes an organisation characterised by formalised and multiple hierarchical structures where standardised procedures govern people’s actions and there is minimal or no discretionary powers vested in employees. Emphasis is on rule reinforcement and the long-term concerns of the organisation are stability and predictability. The hierarchy culture nurtures the use of standard operating procedures and best practices, and has multiple layers of vertical and horizontal silos operating relatively in isolation.

Furthermore, as a more hierarchically and vertically designed body, there is a tendency for top managers’ need for control over the information flow, and the desire to restrict access to critical information by lower-level employees.

The researcher thus identified DAFF’s culture to be strongly related to that of hierarchy.

This is a major limiting factor to driving successful KM in DAFF. The structures and power relationships act as barriers to knowledge sharing. It was therefore sought to determine the factors that could enable a knowledge culture in DAFF by investigating the various cultural aspects that influence knowledge management such as whether information is currently being shared openly and trustingly. The researcher would also seek to uncover whether any measures have been developed to create and develop a knowledge culture.

2.4 THE LINK BETWEEN DAFF’S KIM STRATEGY AND ITS BUSINESS