PowerPoint Presentation

Ph.D. Public Viva-VoceExaminationPG & Research Department of Library & Information ScienceBishop Heber College, Tiruchirapalli.

Doctoral CandidateS.C. Kumaresan (42234/Ph.D/Lib. & Inf. Sc./PT/July 2011)Knowledge Management and Organizational Culture in Libraries of Higher Educational Institutions in Qatar1December 14, 2015Research SupervisorDr. B.S. Swaroop Rani, Associate Professor PG & Research Department of Library & Information ScienceBishop Heber College

1http://www.businessinsider.com/xerox-was-actually-first-to-invent-the-pc-they-just-forgot-to-do-anything-with-it-2012-2

Knowledge Management and Organizational Culture in Libraries of Higher Educational Institutions in QatarDoctoral Committee

Dr . B.S. Swroop RaniAssociate ProfessorPG & Research Department of Library and Information ScienceBishop Heber College

Dr. V. GeethaAssociate ProfessorPG & Research Department of Library and Information ScienceBishop Heber College

Dr. S. GopalakrishnanDeputy Librarian (Retd.)MIT CampusAnna University

External ExaminerDr. S. ThanuskodiAssociate Professor & Head i/c.Department of Library and Information ScienceAlagappa University, Karaikudi.

2December 14, 2015

Presentation AgendaAbout the researchAbout Qatar and higher education in the countryIntroduction of the conceptsResearch problemSignificance of the studyResearch questionsObjectivesVariables of the studyOperational definitionsLiterature reviewResearch gaps

3December 14, 2015

Presentation Agenda (continued)HypothesesResearch methodologyFindingsSuggestionsContributions of the studyScope for future researchActivities undertaken related to the studyAcknowledgements

4December 14, 2015

About the ResearchExamined the relationships and difference between organizational culture and its types with knowledge management and its dimensions.

Used Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument (OCAI) and Knowledge Management Assessment Instrument (KMAI) to examine the relationships.

Identifies what culture(s) type is conducive for knowledge management success in higher education libraries.

Identifies the cultural profile of the higher education libraries in Qatar using Competing Values Framework.5December 14, 2015

State of Qatar / Dawlat Qatar

Qatar is a Middle East peninsular Arab country of arid desert bordering the Persian Gulf and Saudi Arabia.

Area : 11,586 sq. km. (Slightly bigger than Andaman & Nicobar Island).

Capital: Doha.

Currency: Qatari riyal.

Population: 2.169 million (14% Nationals & 86% Expatriates).

Continent: Asia (Middle East).

GDP per capita: $ 93,714.06 USD (2013, World Bank).

Economy: Oil and Gas.6December 14, 2015

Higher Education in QatarQatar University was established in 1973 as the countrys first College of Education.Qatar Foundation has built the Education City (1995), where many foreign universities have set up branch campuses and offer the same quality of education and facilities that their home campuses provide.7December 14, 2015

Universities/Institutes in Education City sponsored by Qatar FoundationAcademic Bridge Program (pre-university college)Carnegie Mellon University in Qatar Faculty of Islamic StudiesGeorgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar HEC Paris Northwestern University in Qatar Sidra Medical & Research CenterTexas A&M University at Qatar Translation and Interpretation InstituteUniversity College of London Qatar Virginia Commonwealth University in Qatar Weill Cornell Medical College in Qatar Qatar National Library (Formerly Central Library EC)Universities/Institutes out of the ambit of Qatar Foundation

College of North Atlantic Qatar Stenden University Qatar University of Calgary QatarState Sponsored Universities/InstitutesCommunity College of Qatar Boys (State sponsored)Community College of Qatar Girls (State sponsored)Hamad Medical Corporation - Health Sciences (State sponsored)Qatar University (State sponsored)

Knowledge Management

A process that helps organizations find, select, organize, disseminate and transfer important information and expertise necessary for activities such as problem solving, dynamic learning, strategic planning and decision making.

8December 14, 2015

Organizational Culture An observable behaviour pattern of a community or organization that emanates from shared values, beliefs and thought. The values and behaviours shapes the physiological and sociological environment of an organization in a unique way and have a strong influence on the decision making process.

Organizational culture is unique for every organization and one of the most difficult things to change (Schein, 2010).9December 14, 2015

Competing Values Framework (CVF)Designed by Robert E. Quinn & John Rohrbaugh in 1983 based on empirical studies.This framework is now a dominant theoretical framework in the world and extremely useful in organizing and interpreting a wide variety of organizational phenomena.

December 14, 201510

Clan CultureAdhocracyCultureHierarchy CultureMarket Culture

Competing Values Framework (Continued)December 14, 201511They proposed two major dimensions that organized them into four main clusters.Flexibility & Discretion vs Stability & Control.Internal Focus & Integration vs External Focus & Differentiation.

Together form four quadrants, each representing a distinct set of organizational effectiveness indicators.

These four clusters of criteria define the core values on which judgments about organizations are made.

The upper left quadrant identifies values that emphasize an internal, organic focus, whereas the lower right quadrant identifies values that emphasize an external, control focus.

Similarly, the upper right quadrant identifies values that emphasize an external, organic focus while the lower left quadrant emphasize internal, control values.

It is because of this competing or opposite value in each quadrant the name Competing Values Framework was given to this model.

Characteristics of the Culture TypesDecember 14, 201512

Characteristics of the Culture Types (Continued)

December 14, 201513

Culture Types and LibrariesKaarst-Brown., et. al., (2004) has applied these principles to libraries. For example, in applying the CVF framework to libraries in terms of the strategic emphasis, a library can have a mixture of one or more of the dominant characteristics as described below:

Clan-oriented: This library emphasizes human development. High trust, openness, and participation persist.

Adhocracy-oriented: This library emphasizes acquiring new resources and creating new challenges. Trying new things and prospecting for opportunities are valued.

Market-oriented: This library emphasizes competitive actions and achievement. Hitting stretch targets and winning points in our community are dominant.

Hierarchy-oriented: This library emphasizes permanence and stability. Efficiency, control, and smooth operations are important.

December 14, 201514

Knowledge Management Assessment Instrument (KMAI)A research tool developed by Sheron Lawson in 2003 to measure the knowledge management activities in organizations. It is a six-process knowledge management cycle that was adapted after extensive research.Knowledge creationKnowledge captureKnowledge organizationKnowledge storageKnowledge dissemination, and Knowledge applicationDecember 14, 201515

Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument (OCAI)It is an instrument that is based on the principles of CVF and allows us to diagnose the organizational culture type, strength, and congruence.The OCAI includes six sub-systemsDominant CharacteristicLeadership StyleManagement of EmployeesOrganizational GlueStrategic EmphasisCriteria for Success

December 14, 201516

Research ProblemThe large expatriate population impacts the organizational culture & knowledge management process, which in turn impacts the organizational effectiveness.

When employees quit, they take with them valuable knowledge about the systems and procedures that they had established and core technical knowledge.

Knowledge management offers the best possible way forward in managing tacit knowledge of the employees. However, education sector in general and libraries in particular have failed to take advantage of the benefits of knowledge management.

Successful implementation of programs and policies will depend on the prevailing culture in each organization.

December 14, 201517

Research Problem (continued)There is no through study on the cultural dynamics of organizations in Qatar and hence, it will be difficult for library managers to implement policies and programs and successfully manage the knowledge management activities.

To that effect, this research helps fill the gap by identifying the organizational culture types and its relationship with knowledge management. December 14, 201518

Significance of the StudyThis study was conducted at the national level, and hence the results have national significance and implications for library directors and the academia.Significant for libraries in preparing strategic plan & management initiatives.Valuable for libraries ready to implement a knowledge management program.Establishes the relationship between organizational culture and knowledge management higher education libraries in Qatar. Identifies what culture type is conducive for the success of knowledge management initiatives in higher education libraries in Qatar.Helps library directors understand the dominant culture existing in their library and the country.Helps in identifying how sustainable business practices can be implemented in libraries with specific culture profiles.No such research has ever been done before in the library sector.19December 14, 2015

Research QuestionsThis study aims to investigate & answer the following research questions:

Research Question 1: Is organizational culture related to knowledge management in the higher education libraries in Qatar?

Research Question 2: Is there a significant relationship between knowledge management and its dimensions to the demographic & employment related factors of the employees working in higher education libraries in Qatar?

Research Question 3: Is there a relationship between organizational culture and its dimensions with knowledge management and its dimensions in the higher education libraries in Qatar?

Research Question 4: Is there a culture type that supports the successful implementation of knowledge management in higher education libraries in Qatar?

Research Question 5: What organizational culture type is dominant in the libraries in higher education libraries in Qatar?

20December 14, 2015

Aims and ObjectivesTo characterize the library culture in Qatar using the taxonomy of four culture type (Clan, Adhocracy, Market and Hierarchy).

To understand if there is a significant difference between knowledge management and its dimensions and the demography & employment factors of the library employees.

To understand the relationship between organizational culture types and knowledge management dimensions.

To identify the dominant culture type existing in the higher education libraries in Qatar.

21December 14, 2015

Variables of the studyDependent variable Knowledge management and its six dimensions; Knowledge creation, Knowledge capture, Knowledge organization, Knowledge storage, Knowledge dissemination and Knowledge application.

Independent variable The four types of organizational culture based on the Competing Values Framework by Cameron and Quinn; Clan/Group, Adhocracy/Developmental, Market/Rational, and Hierarchy.

22December 14, 2015

Review of Literature

Scholarly peer-reviewed literature were reviewed in electronic databases like ProQuest Central (includes LISTA), Science Direct, EBSCO-ASP, Springer, IEEE Explore Digital Library, ABI/Inform complete, Library Literature & Information Science Full Text, Emerald Management Xtra, Emerald Insight, Business Source Complete, Business Full Text, OmniFile FT Mega Edition, Sage Premier, Taylor and Francis Journal Library, Jstor, Cambridge Journals, Oxford University Press Journals & Science Direct.

Qatar National Library, Carnegie Melon University in Qatar, Georgetown University in Qatar, San Jos State University library, CA, United States.

23December 14, 2015

Review of Literature (continued)255 research works were cited from national and international scholarly resources.Review was done for identifying researches conducted in measuring organizational culture using Competing Values Framework.Review was also done to identify the researches conducted in examining the relationships between organizational culture and knowledge management using the tools Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument (OCAI) and Knowledge Management Assessment Instrument (KMAI).The literature reviewed covered the following topicsI. Knowledge Management Assessment InstrumentKnowledge Management.Historical Background of Knowledge Management.Theoretical Foundations of Knowledge Management.

24December 14, 2015

Review of Literature (continued)Knowledge Management Practices.Barriers to Knowledge Management.Knowledge Management & Libraries.Knowledge Management & Academic Libraries.Knowledge Management & Reference Services.ICT tools & Knowledge Management in Libraries.Skills & Competencies Requirement for Applying Knowledge Management.Knowledge Management & LIS Education.Evaluation of Knowledge Management Theory.

December 14, 201525

Review of Literature (continued)

II. Organizational Culture Assessment InstrumentOrganizational Culture.Organizational Culture Definitions & Theory.Managing Organizational Culture.Organizational Culture Assessment.The Competing Values Framework.Organizational Culture & Knowledge Sharing.Organizational Culture & Libraries focus on academic libraries.Knowledge Management and Organizational Culture Research.Knowledge Management & Organizational Culture Studies in Qatar.

December 14, 201526

Research GapsThe literature review revealed that there has been no research conducted to examine the relationship between organizational culture and knowledge management using OCAI & KMAI in the library sector either in Qatar or elsewhere.

There has been no research conducted to identify the organizational culture profile of higher educational libraries in Qatar or in the Gulf region.

December 14, 201527

Hypothesis

The following Null Hypothesis (Ho) were framed for testing

1. NH01: There is no significant difference between knowledge and the employees demography in higher education libraries in Qatar.

2. NH02: There is no significant difference between knowledge management and the employment related factors of the employees in higher education libraries in Qatar.

3. NH03: There is no significant difference between knowledge management and its dimensions (creation, capture, organization, storage, dissemination and application) on account of the availability of a formal knowledge management program in higher education libraries in Qatar

28December 14, 2015

Hypothesis (continued)4. NH04: There is no significant relationship between organizational culture and knowledge management in higher education libraries in QatarSub-Hypothesis:NH0 4:1 There is no relationship between clan culture and knowledge management among the higher education libraries in QatarNH0 4:2 There is no relationship between adhocracy culture and knowledge management among the higher education libraries in QatarNH0 4:3 There is no relationship between market culture and knowledge management among the higher education libraries in QatarNH0 4:4 There is no relationship between hierarchy culture and knowledge management among the higher education libraries in QatarNH0 5: The organizational culture types (clan, adhocracy, market & hierarchy) do not serve to significantly predict knowledge management in higher education libraries in Qatar.December 14, 201529

Research ModelDecember 14, 201530

CreationCaptureOrganization

Storage

Clan/GroupAdhocracy/ DevelopmentalKnowledge ManagementHierarchyDissemination

Application

Market/RationalOrganizational Culture

Research MethodologyResearch Design: The study used a descriptive and quantitative research design; it is cross sectional in nature and sought to determine the correlation of the factors involved.Source of Data and Unit of Analysis: Primary sources - Individual library employees working in higher education libraries were the respondents and constituted the unit of analysis.Universe: Full time library employees working in higher educational libraries in Qatar at the time of data collection constituted the universe. Simple random sampling technique was adopted to collect samples. (Cont.)31December 14, 2015

Research Methodology (Cont..)Sample Size: 195 full time employees working at the time of this research study in higher educational libraries.

Tool of Data Collection: Questionnaire was the preferred tool for data collection, and it had four parts;Part I: Demographic & employment information,Part II: Knowledge Management Assessment Instrument (KMAI), Part III: Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument (OCAI) and Part IV: OCAI for measuring the culture profile.

Data Collection: The collection of was done between October - December, 2013.

32December 14, 2015

Research Methodology (Cont..)KMAI and OCAI Validity and Reliability:

A pilot study to test the reliability of the instruments with a random sample of 50 library employees.

The minimum recommended value of reliability to all variables surpassed the 0.70 as suggested by Nunnally (1978).

33December 14, 2015

December 14, 201534Variables Number of itemsCronbach AlphaOrganizational Culture240.85Clan 60.94Adhocracy 60.90Market60.77Hierarchy 60.70

Reliability AnalysisKnowledge Management & its DimensionsOrganizational Culture & its TypesVariablesNumber of itemsCronbach AlphaKnowledge Management 240.78Knowledge Creation40.78Knowledge Capture40.86Knowledge Organization40.90Knowledge Storage40.77Knowledge Disseminating 40.70Knowledge Application40.87

Research Methodology (Cont..)Data Analysis and Interpretation:

The Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 16.0 was used to analyze the data.

Descriptive and inferential statistics have been applied to the data.

The statistical techniques used in the research include mean, standard deviation, range, Cronbach alpha coefficient of reliability, Independent sample t-test, One-way Analysis of Variance: Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) correlation and Regression analysis.

35December 14, 2015

Findings of the StudyVariableDescriptionFrequencyPercentageGenderMale3831.1Female8468.9Age30 or less129.831 393327.040 495444.350 - 59 1411.560+97.4EducationHigh School Diploma75.7Associates Degree75.7Bachelors Degree2823.0Masters Degree7561.5Doctorate54.1ResidencyNational1613.1Expatriate10686.9

December 14, 201536The Demography Gender, Age, Education & Residency

Findings of the StudyVariableDescriptionFrequencyPercentageHierarchyTop Management86.6Senior Management1512.3Middle Management4032.8Technical Staff3629.5Support Staff2318.9Job Tenure5 years or less3730.36 15 years5444.316 24 years1411.525 years and above1713.9Organizational Tenure1 year or less1613.12 3 years4436.13 4 years3427.95 years and above2823.0Position Tenure1 year or less2318.92 3 years4637.73 4 years3327.05 years and above2016.4Institutional Group Qatar Foundation7259.0Private2218.0Government2823.0Availability of KM ProgramYes1310.7No8065.6Not Sure2923.8

December 14, 201537Employment Factors

Findings of the Study (Continued)T-test (Independent samples T-Test) was applied to ascertain if any significant differences existed between knowledge management and its dimensions and the respondents gender and residency.

Differences in knowledge management and its dimensions with respect to age groups and education were determined by statistically applying ANOVA. Where the ANOVA results revealed significant difference between groups, the same has been further analyzed using post-hoc test, Tukeys Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) Test. December 14, 201538I. Testing of Significance (Demography - Gender, Age, Residency, and Education)

Findings of the Study (Continued)DemographyVariablet-valuep ValueStatistical SignificanceGenderKnowledge Management-0.490.63Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Creation -0.660.51Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Capture -0.280.78Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Organization -0.340.73Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Storage -0.660.51Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Dissemination -0.370.72Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Application -0.250.81Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Residency Knowledge Management-0.290.77Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Creation 17.890.86Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Capture -0.530.60Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Organization -0.160.87Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Storage 0.200.84Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Dissemination 0.030.98Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Application -0.790.43Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05(Results of Annova)f-Valuep ValueAgeKnowledge Management2.420.053Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Creation 1.380.24Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Capture 1.300.28Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Organization 2.450.053Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Storage 1.920.11Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Dissemination 2.080.09Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Application 2.690.06Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05EducationKnowledge Management0.810.52Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Creation 1.370.25Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Capture 0.650.63Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Organization 0.600.66Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Storage 1.260.29Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Dissemination 0.730.58Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Application 0.920.45Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05

December 14, 201539

Findings of the Study (Continued)Demographic characters such as gender, age, residency and education were tested for significant differences. Applying the t- test and ANOVA results, the significance value for the results of both the test for knowledge management is greater than 0.05. Hence, the null hypotheses NH01 is accepted.

Differences in knowledge management and its dimensions with respect to employment factors like group of Institution, hierarchy, job tenure, organizational tenure, and position tenure and availability of KM program groups were determined by statistically applying ANOVA.

Where the ANOVA results revealed significant difference between groups, the same has been further analyzed using post-hoc test, Tukeys Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) Test.December 14, 201540II. Testing of Significance - Employment related Factors

Employment FactorsVariableF-valuep ValueStatistical SignificanceGroup of InstitutionKnowledge Management12.070.00Significant since p value is less than 0.05Creation 14.640.00Significant since p value is less than 0.05Capture 16.780.00Significant since p value is less than 0.05Organization 11.000.00Significant since p value is less than 0.05Storage 3.910.02Significant since p value is less than 0.05Dissemination 0.320.72Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Application 17.680.00Significant since p value is less than 0.05HierarchyKnowledge Management2.370.06Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Creation 4.820.00Significant since p value is less than 0.05Capture 2.000.10Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Organization 3.620.01Significant since p value is less than 0.05Storage 0.600.66Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Dissemination 1.500.21Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Application 1.080.37Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Job TenureKnowledge Management0.230.88Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Creation 0.420.74Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Capture 0.320.81Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Organization 0.620.61Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Storage 0.270.85Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Dissemination 0.170.92Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Application 0.210.89Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Organizational TenureKnowledge Management0.960.44Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Creation 0.390.76Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Capture 1.260.29Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Organization 1.500.22Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Storage 1.280.28Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Dissemination 1.690.17Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Application 0.370.77Not significant since p value is greater than 0.05Position TenureKnowledge Management3.730.01Significant since p value is less than 0.05Creation 3.300.02Significant since p value is less than 0.05Capture 3.670.01Significant since p value is less than 0.05Organization 3.770.01Significant since p value is less than 0.05Storage 4.090.00Significant since p value is less than 0.05Dissemination 2.870.04Significant since p value is less than 0.05Application 3.710.01Significant since p value is less than 0.05

December 14, 201541

Findings of the Study (Continued)Employment factors such as institutional group, hierarchy, job tenure, organizational tenure and position tenure were tested for significant differences.

The results of the ANOVA test for all these variables reveal that the significant values for knowledge management are greater than 0.05 for the groups Hierarchy, Job tenure and Organizational tenure.

However, the values for knowledge management were lesser than 0.05 and statistically significant for Institutional group and position tenure where f=12.07, p