Deliberate Learning and the Evolution of Dynamic Capabilities
Organization Science
KMPI: measuring knowledge management performance
Information and Management
Knowledge management performance evaluation: a decade review from 1995 to 2004
Journal of Information Science
Knowledge management system performance measure index
Expert Systems with Applications: An International Journal
Knowledge Management: An Organizational Capabilities Perspective
Journal of Management Information Systems
Moving beyond tacit and explicit distinctions: a realist theory of organizational knowledge
Journal of Information Science
Expert Systems with Applications: An International Journal
Measuring knowledge management performance using a competitive perspective: An empirical study
Expert Systems with Applications: An International Journal
An effectiveness measurement model for knowledge management
Knowledge-Based Systems
Expert Systems with Applications: An International Journal
Hi-index | 12.05 |
The dynamic capabilities view (DCV) focuses on renewal of firms' strategic knowledge resources so as to sustain competitive advantage within turbulent markets. Within the context of the DCV, the focus of knowledge management (KM) is to develop the KMC through deploying knowledge governance mechanisms that are conducive to facilitating knowledge processes so as to produce superior business performance over time. The essence of KM performance evaluation is to assess how well the KMC is configured with knowledge governance mechanisms and processes that enable a firm to achieve superior performance through matching its knowledge base with market needs. However, little research has been undertaken to evaluate KM performance from the DCV perspective. This study employed a survey study design and adopted hypothesis-testing approaches to develop a capability-based KM evaluation framework (CKMEF) that upholds the basic assertions of the DCV. Under the governance of the framework, a KM index (KMI) and a KM maturity model (KMMM) were derived not only to indicate the extent to which a firm's KM implementations fulfill its strategic objectives, and to identify the evolutionary phase of its KMC, but also to bench-mark the KMC in the research population. The research design ensured that the evaluation framework and instruments have statistical significance and good generalizabilty to be applied in the research population, namely construction firms operating in the dynamic Hong Kong construction market. The study demonstrated the feasibility of quantitatively evaluating the development of the KMC and revealing the performance heterogeneity associated with the development.