Knowledge magement maturity model: a diachronic perspective
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.19132/1808-5245273.350-374Keywords:
Maturity model, Knowledge management, Knowledge management maturity model, ISO 30 401.Abstract
This paper proposes a knowledge management maturity model based on literature review of existing models and having in mind the fundamentals of knowledge management and its evolution. The methodology used was an exploratory qualitative research, with literature review based on the ranking generated by the free access applicative Public or Perish using a variety of data sources (such as Google Scholar and Microsoft Academic Search). The resulting model complies with ISO 30401 (Knowledge Management Systems), with a set of 6 dimensions: People, Culture, Governance, Processes, Organizational Architecture and Infrastructure and Technology, representing the main enablers of knowledge, and six levels: 0 - Individual, 1 - Group, 2 - Organization, 3 – Innovation, 4 – Network, 5 – Fullness, representing the path of knowledge management evolution. The proposed model is based on a concept of knowledge as a social and mental phenomenon that cannot be managed directly. The conclusion, therefore, is that the maturity of knowledge management in an organization can be represented as individual maturity levels for a set of knowledge enablers that constitutes the profile of the knowledge management system and shows how effective it can be.Downloads
References
ALEE, Verna. The future of Knowledge: Increasing Prosperity through Value Networks. New York: Elsevier Science, 2003.
BROOKES, Bertrand. The Foundations of Information Science. Part I: Philosophical Aspects. Journal of Information Science, London, v. 2, n. 2, p. 125-133, 1980.
CHOO, Chun Wei. Sensemaking, Knowledge Creation and Decision Making. In: CHOO, C.W.; BONTIS, N. (org.). The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.
CMMI Product Team. Capability Maturity Model Integration, Version 1.1 – CMMI for Systems Engineering, Software Engineering and Integrated Product and Process Development. Pittsburg: Carnegie Mellon University/SEI, 2001.
DALKIR, Kimiz. Knowledge Management in Theory and Practice. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2017.
DAMIAN, Ieda; SILVA, Elaine; VALENTIM, Marta Lígia. Contribuição dos Modelos de Maturidade para a Gestão do Conhecimento em Contextos Organizacionais. In: VIII Encontro Iberico EDCIC. Coimbra: Universidade de Coimbra, 2017.
DROUIN, Jean. The Spice Project. In: El EMAN, K.; MAGHAVJI, N. (org.). Elements of Software Assessment and Improvement. Los Alamitos: Computer Society Press, 1999.
ESCRIVÃO, Giovana; SILVA, Sérgio Luís da. Knowledge management maturity models: identification of gaps and improvement proposal. Gestão&Produção, São Carlos, v. 26, n. 3, 2019.
FARRADANE, Jason. Knowledge, Information and Information Science. Journal of Information Science, London, v.2, n.1, p 75-80, 1980.
GRANT, Keneth. Tacit Knowledge Revisited: We can still learn from Polanyi. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, Wilton, v.5, n.2, p.173-180, 2007.
ISACA. COBIT 2019 Framework – Introduction and Methodology. Schaumburg, EUA: ISACA, 2019.
ISO. ISO 30.401 – Knowledge Management Systems – Requirements. Geneve: ISO, 2018.
ISO. ISO 9001 – Quality Management Systems: Requirements. Geneve: ISO, 2015.
KRAEMER, Rodrigo et al. Maturidade de Gestão do Conhecimento: uma revisão sistemática da literatura para apoiar o desenvolvimento de novos modelos de avaliação. Perspectivas em Gestão & Conhecimento, João Pessoa, v. 7, Número Especial, p. 66-79, 2017.
KULKARNI, Uday.; ST LOUIS, Robert. Organizational Self-Assessment of Knowledge Management Maturity. Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS), 2003, Tampa. Anais […], v.1. n.1, p. 2542-2551. Tampa: AMCIS, 2003.
LASRADO, Lester Allan; VATRAPU, Ravi; ANDERSEN, Kim Normann. Maturity Models Development in IS Research: a literature review. In: INFORMATION SYSTEMS RESEARCH SEMINAR IN SCANDINAVIA (IRIS 2015), 38, 2015, Oulu, Finland. Anais [...]. Oulu, Finland: Scandinavian Chapter of the Association for Information Systems (AIS), 2015.
McELROY, Mark. The New Knowledge Management: Complexity, Learning and Sustainable Innovation. Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2003.
NONAKA, Ikujiro; TAKEUCHI, Hirotaka. The Knowledge-Creating Company. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.
OLIVEIRA, Mirian et al. Proposta de um Modelo de Maturidade para Gestão do Conhecimento: KM3. Revista Portuguesa e Brasileira de Gestão, Rio de Janeiro, v.10, n.4, p.11-25, 2011.
OLIVEIRA, Mirian; PEDRÓN, Cristiane. Maturity Model for Knowledge Management and Strategic Benefits. Proceedings of the European Conference on Knowledge Management, 2014, Santarém-Portugal. Proceedings […]. Santarém: European Conference on Knowledge Management, 2014.
PAULK, Mark et al. Capability Maturity Model for Software, Version 1.1 Pittsburg: Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie-Mellon University,1993.
PEE, L.G.; KANKANHALI, A. A Model of Organizational Knowledge Management Maturity based on People, Process and Technology. Journal of Information & Knowledge Management, Singapur, v. 8, n. 2, p. 1-21, 2009.
POLANYI, Michael. The Tacit Dimension. London: University of Chicago Press, 1966.
PRUSAK, Laurence. Where dis Knowledge Management Came From? IBM Systems Journal, Riverton, v.40, n. 4, p. 1002-1007, 2001.
WALLACE, Danny. Knowledge Management: Historical and Cross-Disciplinary Themes. Londres: Libraries Unlimited, 2007.
WIIG, Karl. Knowledge Management: Where it Came from and Where Will It Go? Expert Systems with Applications, Arlington, v. 13, n.1, p. 1-14, 1997.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Anderson Luis Cambraia Itaborahy, Renato Plácido Mathias Machado, Lillian Maria Araújo de Resende Alvares
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors will keep their copyright and grant the journal with the right of first publication, the work licensed under License Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0), which allows for the sharing of work and the recognition of authorship.
Authors can take on additional contracts separately for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal, such as publishing in an institutional repository, acknowledging its initial publication in this journal.
The articles are open access and free. In accordance with the license, you must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
