Theoretical Framework for Multi-Agent Collaborative ...

2012

International Conference on Computer & Information Science (ICCIS)

Theoretical Framework for Multi-Agent Collaborative Knowledge Sharing for Competitiveness of Institutions of Higher Learning (IHL) in Malaysia 2 l 3 Abdulwahab Funsho Atanda , Dhanapal Durai. Dominic , Ahmad Kamil B. Mahmood Department of Computer & Information Sciences Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, Seri Iskandar, 31750 Tronoh, Perak, Malaysia I [email protected],

Abstract

2

3 [email protected], [email protected]

Knowledge sharing (KS) being a link between supply

The ultimate goal of KM process is knowledge usage. For

and demand for knowledge has the potential to lead organizations

knowledge to be use, it must be shared. Knowledge needs not

-

to sustainable competitive advantage

(CA)

by leveraging knowledge

for the creation of new knowledge and innovations of new products

only be shared but it must be share effectively and efficiently

and services. However, implementation of KS in most IHL of

for it to attain it objectives. Contrary to the goal of KS is

Malaysia has fall short of delivering these promises due to its

knowledge hoarding based on the concept of "knowledge is

misconception

power" [18][19]. It is belief that whoever holds knowledge

technology

and

centric

lopsided solution

implementation that

lacks

a

as

a

working

social

or

framework.

Bearing this in mind, this work explores the critical success factors of

KS

and

their

interrelationship

to

propose

a

theoretical

hold the key to global economy of knowledge. These two contradictory views co-exist in every organization. Successful

framework for collaborative KS to successfully deliver on its

are the organization that has been able to maintain a positive

promise

when

balance between these conflicting views. Organizations that

implemented has the potential to enhance KS process in IHL and

fail to manage this well are worse off in the new knowledge

enable IHL to attain a sustainable

economy.

of

CA.

enduring

The

proposed

CA

framework

and the framework can also

be adapted to other organizations other than educational sector.

I.

Kidwell et al. [12] advocates complementing techno-centric

INTRODUCTION

approach with learning-centric approach to organizationalKM

Knowledge based economy (KBE) has changed the basis of competitive advantage ( CA) of firms from capital based to intellectual or knowledge base [17][6]. Institutions of Higher Learning ( IHL) been in the knowledge business are the vanguard of transforming nations to KBE due to their unique role of conducting research, developing innovative ideas and human capital development which are the major ingredients of KBE. For IHL to effectively discharge this responsibility and at the same time remains competitive, there is need to embrace knowledge management (KM). Ability to increase efficiency of KM and provide intelligence services in collaborative environments has made MAS a critical component ofKSS.

technologies

for

dealing

with

distributed

collaborative environment and social interaction in knowledge management" and also define MAS as " a group of agents that

can define their goals and actions, and it integrates these functions

to accomplish

a

large

complex

task

such

as

workflow control, knowledge search. Each agent can interact and

collaborate

with

users

or

other

communication for a special problem."

agent

likewise is of no use having a robust KS culture without complementary

technology

to

leverage

it

across

the

individuals

and

organization. One

of

the

biggest

challenges

for

organizations is how to best manage and utilize knowledge and information, particularly with limited resources. How can we make the greatest use of this knowledge and information to operate

more

efficiently,

improve

decision-making,

and

sustain a CA? Despite the benefits derivable from KS to both individuals

Zhang [3] describe agent technology as "one of the most promlsmg

efforts and asserted that it does no organization any good to have robust technology solution without positive KS culture,

through

and the organizations, the resistance of such knowledgeable individuals

to

share

their

knowledge

is

depriving

the

organizations of maximal benefits of such valuable knowledge [17]. This situation though unexpected in IHL, but research

reports indicates poor KS culture across IHL [26] [27] [13]. Compounding the problem of lack ofKS in IHL is the absence of comprehensive study and framework for determining the motivational factors that motivate academicians in IHL to share their knowledge. The ability of KS to confer sustainable

978-1-4673-1938-6/12/$31.00 ©2012 IEEE

[ 31 ]

2012

CA

abound

in

most

International Conference on Computer & Information Science (ICCIS)

of

the

reviewed

literature

"knowledge

=

power, so hoard it" should be replaced with the

[12][29][13][26], however, this claim has not be back up with

new equation of "knowledge

empirical evidences.

multiply". Recent development of IT has heightened the

=

power, so share it and it will

awareness and the powers of managing knowledge, but KM This work intends to enquire and consequently determine factors that motivate academicians in IHL to share their

"is not a technology, although technology should be exploited as an enabler" of knowledge KMS [37].

knowledge. These identified factors will then form the basis of Higher education is the centre of knowledge delivering,

the framework for determining and testing the effect of such of

generating, and learning for human society. It is a significant

collaborative KS and its consequent effects towards the

way for people to develop higher education to improve social

realization of KS efforts in IHL vis- a- vis CA will also be

knowledge structure and to evolve human society. IHL serve

factors

on

knowledge

sharing

in

IHL.

The

effect

incorporated into the framework. The overall aim is to

as a as reservoir of knowledge and are no longer just

develop a theoretical framework that can be empirically

providing knowledge to students. Information practices and

verified for collaborative KS in IHL for the purpose of

learning strategies known as KM are gaining acceptance in the

attaining competitiveness of IHL.

field of education [38]. These institutions manage, blend, and share knowledge among the faculty staff themselves. Thus, knowledge sharing

II. BACKGROUND

is inevitably challenging and an important concept in IHL.

KM - the act of creating, storing, sharing and using

This is evident by the fact that several IHL, particularly in the

knowledge has become a determinant for the attainment of CA

developed world have been receiving grants to implement KM

to IHL. In every society, IHL are entrusted with the role of

practices [28].

conducting innovative research and knowledge innovation [17]. [16], states the importance of knowledge to the overall performance

of

an

organization

and

its CA

cannot

be

Based on the concept of KM according to [39], KM can be describe to be at the centre of a triangle made up of people,

overemphasized. Ability of a firm to sustainably maintain its

process, and technologies as shown in fig. 1 below. However,

CA is directly proportional to the amount of knowledge at its

KMS as currently being implemented is based on people,

disposal [30]. But in a divergent view [7], argues that the

process

willingness of the employees to share their knowledge is of

successful, it must take into cognizance the three components

utmost importance rather than the amount of knowledge being

ofKM triangle - people, process, and technologies.

or

technologies.

For

any

KM

initiatives

to

be

held by the employees. The importance of knowledge as a critical resource to IHL is reflected in its vision and mission. In carrying out its research and teaching functions, large volumes of multi­ disciplinary expertise and administrative knowledge relevant to different communities are generated at both university-wide and faculty levels. The key challenge was to consolidate documents,

knowledge,

and

information

scattered

across

various faculties, departments, staff, and students. Therefore the purpose of KM initiative was to retain and improve access to

knowledge

resources

residing

at

dispersed

locations,

facilitate collaboration, and leverage on various knowledge assets within the IHL to improve operational efficiency and

Figure 1. Knowledge triangle

organizational effectiveness [2]. Knowledge is a key competitive factor of an organization

A.

Knowledge Sharing

and that knowledge drives it powers from being shared rather

KS - the exchange of knowledge among organizational

than on its own [20]. KS is a key component ofKM due to the

employees is a vital component of the KM process [28]. KM

fact that knowledge becomes useful only when it is made

process according to [36] consists of knowledge acquisition,

available to the right user at the right time for decision making

knowledge

documentation,

[21]. KS takes place at several levels of individuals, groups,

knowledge

application.

and intra and inter organizations [22]. For organization to be

processes are: knowledge acquisition, knowledge sharing, and

and

While

knowledge according

transfer to

[40],

and KM

successful in the 21st century, the management of knowledge

knowledge

in the organization has to be adopted and adapted [8].

disseminating and making available knowledge that is already

According to [34], forKS to be successful, the old equation of

known". KS is at the highest rug of KM and constitutes a

[ 32 ]

utilization.

He

defines

KS

as

"the

act

of

2012

International Conference on Computer & Information Science (ICCIS)

major critical success factor of KM implementation [26].

an organization. Fig. 3 below is a knowledge topology

Despite the numerous benefits accruable to organizations from

developed by [7].

KS implementation, some factors are however found to empirically influence the success of KS either positively or

..

negatively.

'

Ku""k�.

:

High

" ."Jl c

III.

.. ." �

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

�

� g

Literatures review reveals that KS is a vital component of

:.:

KM and it's widely believed that a successfully implemented

KS will lead to competitive advantage for the organization

s..in�,)',

lligh

Peacocks

Jo�

Low

Low

Foxel

Au�

Figure 3. Knowledge topology Durakova et ai,2002

[35][41][43]. None of the literatures reviewed so far has model interrelationship between KS, collaboration, innovation and resultant CA. The identified factors for successfulKS are: motivations, collaboration, innovation and of course the ultimate outcome ofKS which is competitive advantage of the firm. The interrelationship between these components

IS

studied, and model to achieve the expected outcome ofKS. A.

Motivatingfactors

B.

Collaboration

IHL in developing world are disadvantage in term of based knowledge, expert researchers, infrastructure and funding as compare to those in developed world [29]. Hence IHL in developing world as Malaysia can employ collaboration as a means of achieving and sustaining their innovative potentials

Factors motivating KS can be generally classified into

and CA.

Social/behavioural and technological. Several motivational theories such as Maslow's, McGregor, Herzberg, McClelland,

Due to difficulty for a single organization to develop its

etc has been employed to explain various perceived factors

needed knowledge capability internally, highly knowledge

that motivated KS. Nature of knowledge, working culture,

intensive organizations such as IHL, research Institutions are

opportunities to share, staff attitude, and motivation to share

focusing on alliances or collaboration with other organizations

are the motivational factors identified by [28] are shown in

to meet their knowledge demand [11]. Also the sources of

fig. 2 below.

expertise is becoming more dispersed as the knowledge base

Considering technology ( IT) as a motivation for KS, [10]

of industry grows and becomes multidimensional, hence the

uses people, context, task, and ICT as motivating factors.

source

Communication, cultural, organizational, and technological

collaboration

of

factors are among the motivating factors to KS identified by

organization

creativity

and

networks [24]

cited

innovation

rather by

than

[11D.

will in

reside the

According

in

the

individual to

[32],

[15]. From above, its evidence that several factors motivate

"Historically, the strength of an academic department rested

KS in organization and that motivation is an enabler for KS

with its resident faculty. Now it depends on the extent to

[42] cited by [35]. Attaining CA by organizations thus

which each faculty member is interconnected with other

depends on finding, attracting, and motivating knowledge

professionals -- worldwide -- pursuing similar interests. We

workers [23].

now have electronic research teams and electronic water coolers. This drastical changes may weakens indigenous workplace relationships and affects workplace cohesiveness." To remain competitive, IHL of the 21st century needs to open up and embrace collaborative knowledge production, and demolish barriers existing between them and the world [4]. The benefits of collaborative KS according to Charles

Oppo)rtll�lllo?s Sh:l�

[cited 4] includes access to teaching materials, scholarly publications, ongoing research, and above all increase in

t.

Figure 2. Knowledge sharing motivators Sohail & Daud,2009

Contrary to the most widely held opinion that motivations spurs employee to share their knowledge, [7] asserted that it is the organizing principles of the organization that matters in KM

rather

than

employee

motivation.

They

therefore

proposed employee topology which can be used to effectively

efficiency and quality education. [4] argue that for IHL to succeed there is need for collaborative KS in areas such as course content development and sharing,

knowledge co­

creation and collaborative learning connection. They also asserted that the effectiveness of IHL as a learning institution determines the value of its credentials and also its prestige. Collaboration enables leveraging of knowledge across spatial

model the desired behaviour of employees by management of

[ 33 ]

2012

International Conference on Computer & Information Science (ICCIS)

and temporal barriers as depicted in collaboration model in

Motivation

fig. 4 below.

D:ffGDlTille ?,lCe·:o-rn(ccoJmhon

Same ?lac:

Collaboration

(3)lcbIooon;) Diffcrenl Place

Di)�Dt:t;a S�lld:roil!)US

Dillrioot(1 A�i]CllroooJS

Coll1.lj)fiJlioo

Co&OO:llWD

Competitive Advantage

Figure 4 Collaboration Model

C.

Figure 5. Proposed MAS collaborative knowledge sharing model

Hypothesis

Innovation

It is a widely held belief that outcome of a successful KS is innovation [44][25][17]. Development of new innovative products or services depends largely on the creation of new knowledge [5][33]. Likewise, achieving a sustained CA in

The following hypotheses are formulated from fig. 5 above. Hypothesis I: Motivation spurs employees to share their knowledge. Hypothesis 2: Collaboration encourages organizations to share

global market is hinged on the development of innovative

knowledge.

products and services [14]. In his submission, [31] argues that

Hypothesis 3: KS encourages Collaboration between

integration of employees' knowledge, skills, and motivations

organizations

are

Hypothesis 4: Collaboration spurs innovative ideas

essential prerequisite

for

enabling

innovation

in

an

organization.

Hypothesis 5: KS leads to innovations.

D.

Hypothesis 6: Innovations leads to CA of organization.

Competitive Advantage

The major intent of organization engaging In KM is the

V. METHODOLOGY

ability of KM to confer CA. The result of well implemented collaborative KS is sustained CA. It is by creating a fit between technological and social system that an organization can sustain a long term CA [9]. Competitiveness on an organization

depends

largely

on

how

effectively

and

Mixed mode methodology shall be employed in conducting this

research,

which

will

involve

both

qualitative

and

quantitative methods. The methodology shall consist of data collection and analysis.

efficiently its knowledge activities are implemented [29]. A.

Data

IV. PROPOSED MAS COLLABORATIVEKS MODEL Literatures review reveals that KS is a vital component of KM and it's widely believed that a successfully implemented

KS will lead to competitive advantage for the organization. This model was developed having considered several factors that motivates KS. The identified factors for successful KS are: motivations, collaboration, innovation and of course the ultimate outcome ofKS which is competitive advantage of the

Data Collection

collection

tools such as questionnaires,

personal

interview, focus group, and library and desk appraisal shall be employed. Two sets of data shall be collected. These are pre and postKSS implementation. Online data collection shall be employed in data collection due to ease of collection and processing. The relevant indicators for knowledge process cycle developed by [1] will be modified and adapted in designing the questionnaires.

firm. The interrelationship between these components is studied, and model to achieve the expected outcome of KS as in fig.5 below.

Data analysis and interpretation

B.

Pre and post KSS implementation data will be analyzed using SEM Amos statistical tool. The data shall be evaluated based on critical success indicators as depicted in fig. 5 so as to determine whether the research objectives are achieved or not.

[ 34 ]

2012

C.

International Conference on Computer & Information Science (ICCIS)

Results & Discussion

Based on the outcome of the data analysis, formulated hypothesis

shall

be

accepted

or

rejected.

The

[15]

accepted

hypothesis will be compare with existing works to determine its variability and compliance. Final conclusion can then be deduced from the obtained results.

[16]

[17]

VI. CONCLUSION Academics of IHL being custodian of knowledge should be

[18]

motivated to share their knowledge effectively so as to unlock their knowledge to facilitate efficiency of knowledge creation and improved innovations and consequently attain sustained CA.

[19]

[20] REFERENCES [I]

[2]

[3]

[4] [5]

P. Akhavan and R. Hosnavi, "Developing a knowledge management tramework based on km cycle in non-profit educational centers: A multi case analysis," in Management of Innovation and Technology (ICMIT), 2010 IEEE International Conference on,2010,pp. 889-893. Atreyi Kankanhalli. (2008). Enabling KM in Large Decentralized Organizations:A Case Study of an Institution of Higher Learning. Available online at http://www.kmtalk.net/article.php?story=20080512092346759 assessed on 19110/2011 C. Zhang,D. Tang,Y. Liu and J. You, "A multi-agent architecture for knowledge management system," in Fuzzy Systems and Knowledge Discovery, 2008. FSKD'08. Fifth International Conference on,2008,pp. 433-437. D. Tapscott and A. D. Williams, "Innovating the 21st-Century University It," Educause Review,pp. 11,2010. Dougherty, D., Munir, K. and Subramaniam, M. (2002),

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

"Managing technology flows in practice:a grounded theory of sustainable

innovation ",

Proceedings, Technology

Academy

of

Management

& Innovation Management Division, pp.

El-E6. Drucker P F. (1995) Managing in a Time of Great Change, Butterworth-Heinemann,Oxford. [7] Durcikova, Alexandra and Everard, Andrea, "An Employee Typology: A Knowledge Management Perspective " . AMCIS 2002 Proceedings. Paper 280. [8] G. Steyn, "Harnessing the power of knowledge in higher education," Education,vol. 124,2004. [9] Ganesh D. Bhatt, "Knowledge management in organizations examining the interaction between technologies, techniques, and people". Journal of Knowledge Management Volume 5. Number 1. 2001. pp. 68-7. [10] P. Hendriks, "Why share knowledge? The int1uence of ICT on the [6]

motivation for knowledge sharing", Knowledge and Process Management, Vol. 6,pp. 91-100,1999.

[II] Kathryn A. Baker and Ghuzal M. Badamshina,(2002),Knowledge Management. Available online at www.au.af.mi1/au/awc/awcgate/doe/benchmark/ch05.pdf assessed on 0611112011. [12] Kidwell, .Iillinda J., Vander Linde, Karen M., and Sandra L. Johnson, "Applying Corporate Knowledge Management Practices in Higher Education. " EDUCAUSE Quarterly, vol. 23, pp. 28 33, 2000. [13] M.Y. Cheng, J.S.Y.Ho and P.M. Lau, "Knowledge Sharing in Academic Institutions: a Study of Multimedia University Malaysia". Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 7 Issue 3,pp313 - 324,2009. [14] E. Miron, M. Erez and E. Naveh, "Do personal characteristics and cultural values that promote innovation, quality, and etliciency

[26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30]

[31] [32]

[33]

compete or complement each other?" J. Organ. Behav., vol. 25, pp. 175-199,2004. N. H. M. Alwi, H. A. Hamid and A. A. Bakar, "Factors Contributing Knowledge Sharing In Higher Learning Institution ", Proceeding of KMICE'08. 2009. S Nilakanta, L Miller and D. Zhu, "Organizational memory management Technological and research issues," Journal of Database Management (JDM), vol. 17,pp. 85-94,2006. N. Ye, F. Zhi-Ping and F. Bo, "Motivation factors that make knowledge workers share their tacit knowledge in universities: An empirical research," in Services Systems and Services Management, 2005. Proceedings of ICSSSM'05. 2005 International Conference on,2005,pp. 923-927 Vol. 2. L Marshall, "Facilitating knowledge management and knowledge sharing: new opportunities for infonnation professionals," Online, vol. 21,pp. 92-98,1997. 1. Rowley, "Is higher education ready for knowledge management? " International Journal of Educational Management, vol. 14,pp. 325-333,2000. K. M. Wiig, "What future knowledge management users may expect," Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 3, pp. 155-166, 1999. K. M. Chao, R. Anane, 1. H Chen and R. Gatward, "Negotiating agents in a market-oriented grid," in Cluster Computing and the Grid, 2002. 2nd IEEE/ACM International Symposium on, 2002, pp. 436-436. ] E. Hustad, "Knowledge networking in global organizations The transfer of knowledge," in Proceedings of the 2004 SIGMIS Conference on Computer Personnel Research: Careers, Culture, and Ethics in a Networked Environment, 2004,pp. 55-64. R. Cross and L Prusak, "The political economy of knowledge markets in organizations," The Blackwell Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge Management, pp. 454472,2003. W. W. Powell, K. W. Koput and L Smith-Doerr, "Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology," Adm. Sci. Q., pp. 116145,1996. A. Satyadas, U. Harigopal and N. P. Cassaigne, "Knowledge management tutorial: an editorial overview," Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C: Applications and Reviews, IEEE Transactions, vol. 31,pp. 429-437,2001. S. Suhaimee, R. A. Alias and A. Z. A. Bakar, "Knowledge management implementation in malaysian public institution of higher education," in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Intellectual Capital, Knowledge Management and Organisational Learning (ICICKM 2005),2005,pp. 479. S Suhaimee, A. Bakar, A. Zaki and R. A. Alias, "Knowledge Sharing Culture in Malaysian Public Institution of Higher Education: An Overview," Proceedings of the Postgraduate Annual Research Seminar 2006. M. S Sohail and S Daud, "Knowledge sharing in higher education institutions: Perspectives from Malaysia,". The journal of information and knowledge management systems, Vol. 39 No. 2, 2009 pp. 125-142 Emerald Group Publishing Limited. S Numprasertchai and B. Igel, "Managing knowledge through collaboration: multiple case studies of managing research in university laboratories in Thailand," Technovation, vol. 25, pp. 1173-1182,2005. S C. Voelpel, R. A. EckhotI and 1. Forster, "David against Goliath? Group size and bystander effects in virtual knowledge sharing," Human Relations,vol. 61,pp. 271-295,2008. H. Tang, "An integrative model of innovation in organizations," Technovation, vol. 18,pp. 297-309,1998. T. L Gritlith,M. A. Fuller and G. B. Northcraft, "Neither here nor there: Knowledge sharing and transfer with proactive structuration," in System Sciences, 2007. RICSS 2007. 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on,2007,pp. 190b-190b. W. Tsai, "Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks Effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance," Academy of management journal, pp. 996-1004,2001.

[ 35 ]

2012

International Conference on Computer & Information Science (ICCIS)

[34] V. Allee, "12 principles of knowledge management," Training & Development, vol. 51,pp. 71-74,1997. [35] Vikas Agrawal,Shahnawaz Muhammed,Ashish Thatte, "Enabling Knowledge Sharing Through Intrinsic Motivation And Perceived IT Support", Review of Business lriformation Systems - Third Quarter 2008 vol. 12(3). [36] S. Yahya and W. K. Goh, "Managing human resources toward achieving knowledge management," Journal of Knowledge Management. vol. 6. pp. 457-468,2002. [37] A. P. Cruz, Knowledge Sharing and Competitiveness of Professional Service Finns: A Case Study,2012.Unpublished [38] L. A. Petrides, "Knowledge management,infonnation systems and organizations," Research Bulletin, 2004. [39] R. Abdullah,R. Atan and M. A. Azmi Murad, "MASK-SM Multi­ Agent System Based Knowledge Management System to Support Knowledge Sharing of Software Maintenance Knowledge Environment," Computer and information science, vol. 3,pp. P52, 2010. [40] A. Tiwana, The Knowledge Management Toolkit: Practical Techniques for Building a Knowledge Management System. Prentice Hall PTR,2000. [41] K. Metaxiotis,K. Ergazakis and.l. Psarras, "Exploring the world of knowledge management: agreements and disagreements in the academic/practitioner community," Journal of knowledge management, vol. 9,pp. 6-18,2005. [42] 1. Tuomi, "Data is more than knowledge: Implications of the reversed knowledge hierarchy for knowledge management and organizational memory," in System Sciences, 1999. H1CSS-32. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on,1999,pp. 12 pp. [43] S Abram, "Post Information Age Positioning for Special Librarians: Is Knowledge Management the Answer? " lriformation outlook, 1997. [44] .I. C. Spender and R. M. Grant, "Knowledge and the finn: overview," Strategic Manage. J.,vol. 17,pp. 5-9,1996.

[ 36 ]