Demographic differences in using knowledge creation tools among faculty members
Journal of Knowledge Management
Published online on August 02, 2017
Abstract
Journal of Knowledge Management, Volume 21, Issue 4, Page 857-871, July 2017.
Purpose The purpose of this study is to investigate and analyze demographic differences in using knowledge creation tools among faculty members. It also attempts to identify the most knowledge creation tool used by the participants. The tools comprised of 13 items including data mining, metadata, classifications, expert profiling, Mashup and blogs. Design/methodology/approach Data were collected through an online survey questionnaire. A total of 300 faculty members from 26 universities and colleges accredited by the UAE Ministry of High Education participated in the study. The t-test and analysis of variance (ANOVA) test are used to validate the stated hypotheses. Findings The study found personal knowledge management to be the most used knowledge creation tool among the faculty members, followed by authoring tools and templates. Findings of the study indicate statistically no significant difference in using knowledge creation tools with respect to gender, qualification, academic rank, teaching experience and institutional affiliation. These findings support the stated null hypotheses (H1, H3, H4, H6 and H8) and suggest that the use of knowledge creation tools is independent from these variables. However, the results showed statistically a significant age group difference, academic specialization and research experience in using knowledge creation tools. The findings reject the assumed hypotheses (H2, H5 and H7) and suggest the impact of these variables on the use of knowledge creation tools. Research limitations/implications The paper is based on the data collected through a survey questionnaire. Future studies may combine quantitative and qualitative data collection methods for the purpose of comparison and in-depth analysis. Practical implications Findings could be an important reference for knowledge management officers and knowledge intensive organizations and institutions to develop knowledge creation tools and promote usage among knowledge workers. Originality/value The paper represents one of the very few empirical studies conducted on the use of knowledge creation tools. Findings of the study may contribute to the process of knowledge creation among faculty members and also to the improvement of knowledge management in the academic environment and other knowledge organizations.
Purpose The purpose of this study is to investigate and analyze demographic differences in using knowledge creation tools among faculty members. It also attempts to identify the most knowledge creation tool used by the participants. The tools comprised of 13 items including data mining, metadata, classifications, expert profiling, Mashup and blogs. Design/methodology/approach Data were collected through an online survey questionnaire. A total of 300 faculty members from 26 universities and colleges accredited by the UAE Ministry of High Education participated in the study. The t-test and analysis of variance (ANOVA) test are used to validate the stated hypotheses. Findings The study found personal knowledge management to be the most used knowledge creation tool among the faculty members, followed by authoring tools and templates. Findings of the study indicate statistically no significant difference in using knowledge creation tools with respect to gender, qualification, academic rank, teaching experience and institutional affiliation. These findings support the stated null hypotheses (H1, H3, H4, H6 and H8) and suggest that the use of knowledge creation tools is independent from these variables. However, the results showed statistically a significant age group difference, academic specialization and research experience in using knowledge creation tools. The findings reject the assumed hypotheses (H2, H5 and H7) and suggest the impact of these variables on the use of knowledge creation tools. Research limitations/implications The paper is based on the data collected through a survey questionnaire. Future studies may combine quantitative and qualitative data collection methods for the purpose of comparison and in-depth analysis. Practical implications Findings could be an important reference for knowledge management officers and knowledge intensive organizations and institutions to develop knowledge creation tools and promote usage among knowledge workers. Originality/value The paper represents one of the very few empirical studies conducted on the use of knowledge creation tools. Findings of the study may contribute to the process of knowledge creation among faculty members and also to the improvement of knowledge management in the academic environment and other knowledge organizations.