Technology infrastructure has been identified as one of the knowledge management enablers that can enhance or inhibit effective knowledge management practices of knowledge creation, knowledge sharing, knowledge transfer and knowledge application (Skyrme 1998; McCammpbell, Clare & Glitters, 1999; Choy & Suk 2005; Arntzen & Ndlela 2009; Suresh 2012). Further, the literature in Chapter Two established that information technology was one of the most important critical success factor for knowledge management implementation in universities (Mathi 2004; Basu & Sengupta 2007; Nuryasin, Prayudi & Dirgahayu 2013; Nasiruzzaman, Qudaih & Dahlan 2013; Yaakub, Othman & Yousif 2014; Shoemaker 2014). The sixth objective of the study was to explore technological infrastructure that supported knowledge management in administration at UNZA. This was meant to find out if technological infrastructure and systems supported effective knowledge management in administration.
The findings of the survey established that the university had an information system architecture that had been implemented to enhance the effective access to information, interpersonal and group communication and collaboration. It is evidenced when a cumulative percentage of 77.3% of respondents indicated higher scores of recently implemented, progressing well and visible throughout the university. These results on availability of information system architecture corroborate with interview results where interviewees were able to identify such systems as the internet, intranet, Student Information System, Accys Peopleware Human Resources and Payroll system, Unicorn Library system, Resident Engineer’s system, and the Sage500 Line Accounting system. However, interviewees were quick to mention that not all administrative and management staff had access to all the systems, as accessibility was dependant on the job responsibilities. The interviews most importantly revealed that the usability of the systems identified was not meant for knowledge management purposes. It was established that most administrative and management staff did not use the intranet and other systems because the university leadership had not enforced the use of the systems. The governance of the systems was poor and that in most cases even decisions by university leadership were not based on information and knowledge from the systems. The study therefore established that the university had adequate technology systems architecture but due to low levels of usability, they did not support effective knowledge management practices. A scenario forewarned by
128
Davenport & Prusak (1998) that effective knowledge management needed a mix of people and technology where people needed to be ready for knowledge management by using technology, failure to which, technology alone does not help.
Further, the study established that technology infrastructure was available and accessible in administrative departments. The survey revealed that a cumulative percentage of 77.3% of respondents indicated higher scores of recently implemented, progressing well and visible throughout the university. These responses were corroborated by interview findings where respondents stated that there was accessibility and connectivity to technology infrastructure such as computers, printers, fibre optic cables, internet, servers and radio links. The majority of interviewees however, lamented that the utilization of the technology infrastructure was very poor in most areas of knowledge management practices, apart from knowledge creation. In most instances, usability was not meant for knowledge management practices, as more often, staff would use them for personal businesses such as social media and online businesses. A critical analysis therefore shows that despite having adequate technology infrastructure, university administration did not fully utilise the infrastructure, and therefore the technology infrastructure did not support effective knowledge management. In as much as technology has been identified by some scholars such as Alavi & Leidner (2001) that it plays an important role in supporting the organizational knowledge process, its utilization by people is of vital importance for effective knowledge management. That is why McCampbell, Clare & Glitters (1999) argued that information technology was one of the key factors that influenced knowledge management implementation, as long as it is well developed and well utilized.
The study also established that the university lacked knowledge management application software. The survey revealed that a cumulative percentage of 53.4% of respondents indicated lower scores of not taking place at all, aware of this practice and considering implementation, when responding to a statement if dedicated knowledge management software applications were functionally integrated and continuously aligned with the university’s formal information systems. The interviews revealed that there was no evidence of knowledge management application software that supported decision making. Some interviewees only identified such systems as the Student Information System and Sage500 Line accounting system as software, but that most of the decisions in administration and management were not made based on data from the said systems. These revelations indicate that the university did not have knowledge management application software and
129
hence, no support to knowledge management processes. Similar findings were recorded by Botha & Fouché (2002) in the South African business companies where a few, about 32% implemented knowledge management application software.
In view of the above interpretation and discussion on the exploration of technological infrastructure and systems and their support to effective knowledge management, it can be concluded that UNZA has adequate technological infrastructure. However, the identified technology infrastructure are underutilized to support effective knowledge management practices of knowledge sharing and knowledge application. Further, the underutilization has been tolerated by university leadership, since they have not enforced proper usage of these infrastructures. In a similar manner, it can be observed that the culture in administration does not encourage knowledge management practices and therefore there is lack of culture alignment with technology. The university’s profile on technology can therefore be ranked as
recently implemented, because infrastructure is adequate but due to underutilization and
improper use, they do not support effective knowledge management at UNZA. UNZA administration and leadership’s enforcement of proper utilization of technology infrastructure and systems, acquiring or developing and using knowledge management application software, coupled by addressing administrative culture towards enhancing knowledge management in administration would make technology to move the ranks to progressing
well on the score of the questionnaire.
5.6 MEASUREMENT OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT ENABLERS IN