216 Anand, Pauleen, and Dexter
Copyright © 2005, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
had been forgotten about, or staff members had left the organisation and, as a result, the
information was not readily accessible. However, despite this seemingly strong knowl-
edge-sharing practice, there was still a culture of structural silos within the organisation,
with little boundary crossing between departments. This was emphasized in the policy
areas where staff members were closeted in offices and were rarely seen to leave other
than at lunchtime or at the end of the day.
Concurrent to the increasing level of staff turnover and problems arising from
structural silos, the Bank was going through an organisational “rightsizing” program.
There was also growing interest in knowledge management within the wider environment
at a national level from the government and public sector as well as within commercial
and academic circles.
Knowledge management, as it is currently understood, has been around for more
than a decade. The term has, however, spawned a proliferation of definitions. Snowden
defines it succinctly (1999) as:
The identification, optimisation, and active management of intellectual assets, either
in the form of explicit knowledge held in artefacts or as tacit knowledge possessed by
individuals or communities (p. 63).
The predominant focus of organisations embracing knowledge management has
been the potential for higher levels of profitability, greater market share, and increased
innovation. However, there are wider potential benefits for organisations that success-
fully manage their knowledge, including a flexible approach to change and better
workplace morale (Scherer, 2001). In the public sector, Wiig (2002) contends that
knowledge management can enhance decision making, assist public participation in
decision making, build competitive societal intellectual capital capabilities, and assist in
the development of a knowledge-intensive workforce. It can also bring much needed
assistance in the area of knowledge sharing, which has historically been an area of
difficulty for the public sector (OECD, 2003).
Much academic research pertaining to knowledge management has been predomi-
nantly published in the information science/information technology (IS/IT) literature
(Newell et al., 2002) and has led to information systems and technology becoming
synonymous with knowledge management. More recently, the field has undergone a
change in focus from a predominantly technological approach to a more integrated
approach (Gold, Malhotra, & Segars, 2001), which has encouraged organisations to bring
a more holistic approach to their knowledge management efforts.
Implementation of knowledge management has proved a problem for many
organisations. Despite recognition of the potential benefits that knowledge management
may offer, many organisations simply did not know where to start (Earl, 2001). Knowledge
management best practice has been well documented (Davenport, De Long, & Beers,
1998; Chourides, Longbottom, & Murphy, 2003; Mertins, Heisig, & Vorbeck, 2001) and
is often an approach advocated by knowledge management consultants. The downside
of best practice is that while it provides examples of implementation approaches that
organisations may adopt, it does not take into account the individual factors of the
organisation, including the external environment, the internal environment, technology,
culture, and infrastructure. Knowledge management is not a “one size fits all” solution,