Murray E. Jennex

A Model of Knowledge Management Success

This article describes a knowledge management (KM) success model that is derived from observations generated through a longitudinal study of KM in an engineering organization and KM success factors found in the literature, which were modified by the application of these observations and success factors in various projects. The DeLone and McLean (1992, 2003) IS Success Model was used as a framework for the model, since it was found to fit the observed success criteria and provided an accepted theoretical basis for the proposed model.

Assessing Knowledge Management Success

This article proposes a framework for assessing knowledge management system (KMS) success models. The framework uses three criteria: how well the model fits actual KMS success factors, the degree to which the model has a theoretical foundation, and if the model can be used for both types of KMSs. The framework is then applied to four KMS success models found in the literature and is determined to be a useful framework for assessing KMS success models.

Assessing knowledge management success/effectiveness models

This paper proposes a framework for assessing knowledge management system, KMS, success models. The framework uses three criteria: how well the model fits actual KMS success factors, the degree to which the model has a theoretical foundation, and if the model can be used for two types of approaches to building a KMS. The framework is then applied to four KMS success models found in the literature and is determined to be a useful framework for assessing KMS success models.

Organizational memory/knowledge effects on productivity, a longitudinal study

This paper discusses a longitudinal study that explored the relationship between use of organizational memory and knowledge (OM/K) and knowledge worker productivity within the engineering group at a nuclear power plant. Three data points were taken over five yeas. An OM/K System (OM/KS) was identified that improved effectiveness/productivity of the organization. The basic components of the OM/KS remained the same over the study. A key and unexpected finding was that hew members of the organization did hot consider the OM/KS as effective as established members and tended hot to use the system until they became established members themselves. To explain the success of the OM/KS, DeLone and McLeans IS Success Model was adapted to OM/KS.

Towards a consensus knowledge management success definition

– The purpose of this paper is to propose a definition of KMS success., – The paper uses a consensus‐building approach to derive the definition. An expert panel was used to generate a list of possible KM success definitions. A survey was used to identify a likely definition from this list. A second survey was used to further refine the proposed KM success definition. Finally, analysis of the survey comments was used to finalize the proposed definition., – KM success is a multidimensional concept. It is defined by capturing the right knowledge, getting the right knowledge to the right user, and using this knowledge to improve organizational and/or individual performance. KM success is measured by means of the dimensions: impact on business processes, impact on strategy, leadership, and knowledge content., – An additional survey should be performed that tests the constructs of the proposed KM success definition. Additionally, future research should focus on identifying a set of measures that can be used to measure KM success and determining whether KM and KM System (KMS), success are the same or different constructs., – The proposed definition of KM success provides practitioners with four dimensions that can be used to construct organization‐specific measures for indicating when their KM initiative is successful., – This is important, as the literature, while providing much support for identifying KM critical success factors, does not provide a definition of when KM can be considered successful. Knowing when a KM initiative is successful is important for organizations and practitioners.

Success Factors for Offshore Information System Development

Abstract This paper investigates key factors affecting the success of small to medium organizations providing offshore software development, usually to companies in the United States. Five success factor groups (people factors, technical infrastructure, client interface, business infrastructure, and regulatory interface) with a total of 31 critical success factors were identified through a literature review. The critical success factors were assessed for importance by surveying individuals in organizations that outsource system development or that provide system development services. The survey found that the critical success factors of workers’ skills, client knowledge, trust in the client-outsourcer relationship, telecommunications, and intellectual property protection are the most critical to the success of offshore software development outsourcers. Somewhat surprising was that cost was not the most critical success factor. The paper concludes with a discussion on the implications of these findings to outsourcers and outsourcing clients.

Modeling Emergency Response Systems

This paper discusses a model for an emergency response system. The model is based on a review of the literature and the incorporation of lessons learned from Hurricane Katrina response. The paper takes a holistic view of a system in that an emergency response system is viewed as including emergency response members, procedures, and the organization as well as the ICT components of the system

Towards Defining Knowledge Management Success

Discussions at previous HICSS conferences have shown that there is no general agreement on definitions of knowledge management (KM) and knowledge management systems (KMS) success. A deep understanding of these concepts would help to design and implement efficient KM initiatives and systems. We present an exploratory research study to begin and facilitate a debate that will hopefully lead to a consensus definition of KM and KMS success. We chose an expert panel approach followed by two exploratory surveys to approach the KM and KMS success definition. The research shows only a few points of consensus. We present areas of agreement as well as of disagreement, which serve as a good starting point for further discussions on KM and KMS success

Security as a contributor to knowledge management success

Security is an important topic, but is it important for Knowledge Management (KM)? To date, little mainstream KM research is coming through with a security focus. This paper asks why, and proposes that security be integrated into KM success models. The Jennex and Olfman (International Journal of Knowledge Management 2(3):51–68, 2006) KM success model is used to illustrate how security, specifically risk management, and the National Security Telecommunications and Information System Security Committee (NSTISSC) security model can be applied to KM management support and governance and KM Strategy. Finally, two case studies are provided that illustrate the application of risk management through governance to KM.

Towards Measuring Knowledge Management Success

Discussions at previous HICSS conferences have revealed that there is no general agreement on definitions of knowledge management (KM) and knowledge management system (KMS) success. We developed these concepts and presented them earlier this year. Using an expert panel approach followed by two exploratory surveys, we identify KM success measures. The research demonstrates that measures for KM success are required on multiple dimensions. This paper thus also presents a set of dimensions with measures that can be used to determine if KM in an organization is successful.