APPLICATION OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT IN THE MALAYSIAN AIRLINE INDUSTRY: A CRITICAL REVIEW Rain Low Swee Foon and Lum

Soo Eurn SEGi University College 9, JalanTeknologi, Taman Sains Selangor, Kota Damansara PJU5, 47810 Petaling Jaya E-mail: rainlow@segi.edu.my

ABSTRACT

Knowledge has been perceived as the key strategic asset of an organization in the current competitive and unprecedented business environment, particularly in the vulnerable airline industry which has been tremendously affected by the soaring world oil price. As the future success of airlines comes to depend on how quickly and flexibly airlines respond to changes in customer demand, an uncertain business environment as well as competitors’ challenges, greater emphasis needs to be placed on how knowledge management can bring competitive advantage for the organization in the form of superior operational effectiveness and strategic positioning. Knowledge management covers broad and multidimensional aspects like ICT, organizational learning, intellectual capital (human capital, relationship capital and structural capital), organization design (complex knowledge), and e-commerce. The literature review conducted shows that the application of knowledge management in the industry focuses mainly on the four major constructs, namely ICT, organizational learning, intellectual capital and knowledge sharing. The objective of this paper is to analyze the current use of knowledge management in the Malaysian airline industry and to provide a strategy for the future use of knowledge management in the industry.

1.0 INTRODUCTION Knowledge is a shared collection of principles, facts, skills and rules embodied within a firm’s knowledge assets through which competitive advantage is achieved (Stonehouse and Pemberton, 1999). Managing knowledge is a prerequisite for companies operating in today’s hyper-competitive and ever-changing environment whose survival and performance is dependent on their relative speed and ability to develop durable and adaptable knowledge-based competencies (Nonaka, 1991). Knowledge, while difficult to manage, is a strategic organizational asset (Shepard, 2000) and according to Nonaka (1991), is the only lasting source of competitive advantage. Knowledge can be specific or generic to varying degrees (Stonehouse and Pemberton, 1999). Specific knowledge is unique to the firm and as such, is a more likely source of competitive advantage and the basis of core competences compared to generic knowledge which is necessary for operating the business (Stonehouse and Pemberton, 1999).

12

and leveraged to produce higher-valued assets (Klein and Prusak in Stewart. tolerant of failure and supportive of superior performance. suppliers. stakeholder relationships (customers. flexible. Intellectual capital refers to intellectual materials that have been formalized. trusting. partners.The airline industry with its scale. processes. corporate culture. 1999). Examples of KM-friendly organization culture are being innovative. complexity. competence). with appropriate rewards and incentives. 1. performance-oriented. Organizations learn as their individual members learn (Argyris and Schon. stories and spaces (McDermott and O’Dell. Internet technology. 1. government). brands). 13 . faster and cheaper than they would otherwise have been solved (Christensen. 1999).2 Organizational Learning Organizational learning represents a conscious effort of the organization to develop and is a continuing and continuous process aimed at acquiring skills and knowledge (Pemberton and Stonehouse. in order to transfer and apply such knowledge to solve specific tasks better. and its dependence on knowledge and information as a source of competitive advantage makes an excellent case for demonstrating how Knowledge Management (KM) is used to gain competitive advantage. captured. the new business paradigm of knowledge is power and a knowledge-era global phenomenon has made intellectual capital more crucial than financial capital. KM-friendly organization culture is a necessity for successful KM implementation. 1999). know-how. problem solving. and portals are key KM infrastructures (Pemberton and Stonehouse. team-oriented. But the willingness to share knowledge is dependent on organizational culture which is embedded within a firm’s structure. 1997). stored and disseminated to the right people at the right time. adaptable. processed. highly competitive and volatile nature. risk taking. 1996) and individual learning is dependent on the organization’s cultural. the context can hasten or hamper the learning process (Pemberton and Stonehouse. 2001). 1.1 Information and Communication Technology (ICT) ICT enables KM by allowing vast amounts of data to be captured. enthusiasm for the job. This study specifically explores the following KM-related aspects in relation to the current and potential use of KM within the Malaysian airline industry. 1. sharing information freely. It comprises human resources (skills. intranets. structure. 2007). management style.3 Intellectual Capital In the competitive business landscape of the 21st century. and infrastructure context in which it takes place.4 Knowledge Sharing and Culture This process of KM identifies existing and accessible knowledge. web-based interfaces. and organizational resources (systems. intellectual property.

cargo 14 . MAS follows a differentiation strategy and charges a fare premium. Due to their different strategic positioning. maintenance. seat assignments Two class (dilution of seating capacity Ticketless. where it consists of one full service carrier (FSC) Malaysia Airline System (MAS) and two no-frills carriers. global alliances (hub-tospoke) Full service. namely AirAsia and Firefly. In contrast. IATA ticket contract Primary Online. Product features Brand Fares AirAsia (LCC) One brand: low fare Simplified fare structure. AirAsia and MAS differ in their customer value propositions as well as target market segments. code share. Table 1 provides a summary of the main differentiating characteristics between MAS and AirAsia. MAS and AirAsia operate on different business models. cargo Table 1: Product Features of Airasia and MAS (O’Connell and Williams. Following Porter’s (2001) generic competitive strategy. 2005) Product Seating Class segmentation Check-in Airport Distribution Connections Ticketless Secondary (mostly) Online and direct booking Point-to-point Customer service Inflight Aircraft utilization Turnaround time Aircraft Ancillary revenue Operational activities Generally underperforms Pay for amenities Very high 25 minutes Single type: commonality Advertising.2. free seating One class (high density) MAS (FSC) Brand extensions: fare+service Complex fare: structure+yield management Multiple integrated product Generous pitch.g. AirAsia uses a cost leadership strategy. on-board sales Core (flying). direct. offers reliability Complementary extras Medium to high: union contracts Low turnaround: congestion/ labor Multiple types: scheduling complexities Focus on the primary product Extensions: e. extending to tour operations. financial services. 60-70 percent cheaper than MAS’s fares One product: low fare Small pitch. The Malaysian airline industry is tightly regulated by the government and was dominated by the state-controlled MAS before the government’s domestic liberalization exercise opened up the market to allow AirAsia to join the industry. travel agent Interlining. As a full service carrier (FSC).0 INDUSTRY ANALYSIS The Malaysian airline industry is in an oligopoly market structure.

AirAsia is currently the leading domestic carrier with 6. MAS’s e-ticketing is to save it RM 19 per ticket and e-CRM is helping it to manage its frequent flyer loyalty program and utilize customer database more effectively (MAS. in addition to the airline industry’s turbulent operating conditions. AirAsia had successfully stimulated and captured the growth of discretionary air travel traffic by targeting mostly first-time travelers and budget leisure travelers. The business expansion was tremendous and has since captured a significant market share in South East Asian countries. The systems also play a pivotal role in generating and integrating information assets into organizational decision-making and a knowledge building process which helps to improve airlines’ value chains and operational efficiency. despite being an award-winning airline. 15 . business process management (BPM). This. mobile work. Firefly (Thomas. 2007). AirAsia has set up a new franchise airline. See Appendix 1for on how ICT enables connectivity to multiple direct sales channels in the aviation industry.. 2008). namely the yield management system (YMS). 2007).4 million. Competition between the two is intensifying as both begin to move into each others’ core markets and engage in price-cutting measures. 2005). computer reservation system (CRS). 3.2 million to 7 million passengers within 2 years) and minimize costs as a direct sales engine by eliminating commissions paid to travel agents and ticketing and handling costs (AirAsia. AirAsia X to service long-haul routes and as a defensive move MAS has set up its own LCC.0 CURRENT USE OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT IN THE MALAYSIAN AIRLINE INDUSTRY 3. MAS. has struggled financially in the past and has only recently completed its business turnaround exercise. The CRS helps to fuel AirAsia’s dramatic growth (from 2. MAS is embarking on a business transformation to secure its future competitive position. Moving on. YMS helps airlines to maximize revenue for each flight and is instrumental in improving MAS’s previously poor yields. and enterprise resource planning system (ERP). 2007). declining yields and increased foreign competition paints a long and difficult road ahead for both airlines. MAS’s new Integrated Human Resource Management System has helped it to reduce administration costs.In year 2001.1 Information Communication Technology The modern airline industry is dependent on ICT for its operations. Competitive advantage will have to be gained through operational effectiveness and strategic positioning (Porter. content management. 2001). Meanwhile.5 million passengers compared to MAS’s 5. and knowledge sharing are also employed within the industry. AirAsia has realized increased revenue (3-4%) for the same number of aircrafts by leveraging on computer forecasted high/ low demand patterns that effectively shift demand from low to high periods and by charging a premium for late bookings (Kho et al. business intelligence. improve data management and increase its HR division’s efficiency (MAS. Other KM technologies such as collaboration. Its low cost strategy and successful positioning strategy in Asian market that has putting it as the market leader in the Asian airline industry.

MAS is using its knowledge from the recently ended business turnaround exercise to improve its future competitiveness.3. Efforts are aimed towards improving the cost structure through more effective yield management and better fuel hedging strategies. 1992) with new ways of doing things and new business opportunities. Both airlines are now engaging in a promotional price war via their company websites. MAS. standards. AirAsia is generating new competences centered on industry learning by adding financial services. 16 . organizations can learn from their own and their industry’s experience which MAS did with its diverse business committee team. timely. Going further. processes and technology. the organizational learning context consists of three elements. and user-centric educational activities via consolidated access to learning and training resources from multiple sources. MAS also intends to learn the knowhow of managing a low-cost operation before adopting Firefly’s processes into MAS (MAS. Its pilots have managed to lower fuel consumption by 20 % and doubled the landings it gets from the tires (Ricart and Wang. MAS’s internal division facilitated the replacement of its severely inadequate legacy accounting system to result in improved quality and timeliness of information for management decision-making and significant reduction in manpower (MAS. with its aim to become the lowest cost airline in every market that it serves is relentless in cutting costs. Meanwhile. Through Firefly. a new budget airline to compete more effectively with AirAsia. Both airlines use an integrated performance management system to improve staff competency and secure future talent. Pemberton and Stonehouse (1999) assert that only those businesses that keep abreast with technological developments will be able to manage knowledge effectively. According to Ingram and Baum (1997). after its successful business turnaround is learning to internalize the new ways of working whereas AirAsia is learning to cope with its market expansion and cost efficiency. will lead to improved organizational performance. Staff is a key aspect of knowledge management as knowledge is developed and controlled by them. Technology plays a major role in KM. performance targets and adopting best practices. Technology also forms the basis of airlines’ distribution model. KM has helped both airlines to continuously improve their operational effectiveness by setting procedures. MAS and AirAsia both own training academies as part of their human capital development plans and have made leadership development a priority.2 Organizational Learning MAS and AirAsia are continuously learning to gain knowledge. current. AirAsia and MAS have emerged from their respective double-loop (Argyris and Schon. 2005). people. AirAsia. 1978) and generative learning (Senge. MAS’s e-learning portal provides it with personalized. resulting in rapid learning and greater intelligence that will lead to the generation and sustenance of competitive advantage. 2007). they are learning to cope with the difficult operating conditions faced by many global airline companies. It has set up Firefly. It is also expanding into long-haul flight operations through a new franchise airline. that when applied. and tour and accommodation to its product offer. Together. It has clear policies and guidelines covering all areas of flight operations. 2007).

tour and accommodation. which is low-cost. MAS is moving towards greater employee empowerment and involvement and is using web-based talent management solutions to support compliance training.3. AirAsia. and offered the routes which were not effectively served competitors. Both leverage on their respective expertise in training and development (AirAsia) and aircraft maintenance and services (MAS. Through code-sharing and inter-linking 17 . In other words. MAS has entered into various new code-sharing partnership agreements with other airlines as well as establishing a Suppliers’ Forum for supplier relationship management. Both airlines have taken steps to protect their intellectual capital in the event of staff turnover by having succession plans for key personnel. 2007b). stakeholder relationship and organizational resources. AirAsia’s people play a key role in the success of its low-cost business model. MAS has taken a more proactive approach in engaging its stakeholders (government. In terms of the human resources aspect. As a result. MAS is using its established premium airline brand to attract and retain more passengers. and charity and community projects to raise brand awareness in both its current operating and non-operating markets. AirAsia possessed the knowledge capabilities of identifying what customers want. creating profitable routes under-served by other airlines within South-East Asia. AirAsia also stresses internal recruitment and relies on its Human Resources Department for this. Meanwhile. AirAsia’s excellent negotiation and lobbying skills with governments. AirAsia regards its AirAsia brand as a valuable asset and has been aggressively promoting it using bold branding strategies such as high-profile sports sponsorships (such as Formula One racing and Manchester United Football Club). Meanwhile. government. especially in the airline industry. international partners and suppliers have been critical success factors to the company especially in supporting its business development and planning strategies. Maintaining favorable relationships with stakeholders is paramount for any businesses. AirAsia trains its employees to be innovative multitaskers and team players. It has also leveraged its powerful brand and branding expertise to diversify into financial services. Both airlines also actively engage their stakeholders in their performance. reporting. MAS’s revenue from third party work grew from RM 100 million in 2005 to RM 300 million in 2007 (MAS. suppliers. and performance management across its global workforce. 3. They are human resources. commercial partners. where stakeholders yield considerable power. partners and suppliers) through a new External Relations Department to help meet its various interests. indeed started its business by tackling the basic flight passengers’ need. as well as efficiently increasing flight frequencies in established and high growth markets. and customers to establish a powerful network which they can leverage to their advantage. airport authorities.4 Knowledge Sharing and Culture Airlines share knowledge with both internal members and external parties such as financial institutions.3 Intellectual Capital Analysis on the intellectual capital in the Malaysian airline industry can be grouped into three different perspectives. issues and plans using a variety of means such as the media and intranet to raise their company profiles and improve communication with employees. AirAsia) to perform third party work to generate additional profit streams.

Social networks that form the basis of an online corporate-wide directory are embedded with instant messaging and e-mail links that provides a valuable resource for employees that go beyond the corporate directory (Powers. helps to facilitate knowledge sharing. (2004) are imperative factors for knowledge sharing to take place. value-added customized products and services. 2004). Competitive advantage as mentioned by Porter (2001) can be achieved through operational effectiveness and strategic positioning. provide individuals with tailored learning for more effective knowledge transfer. effective consensus building and teamwork. It is believe that ICT will continue to be the central element in most knowledge management implementations in this competitive market. Moreover. Silo mentality is counterproductive to the sharing of knowledge as the focus is inward and information communication is vertical. process. Instant messaging. Meanwhile. allowing it to combine conventional resources in distinctive ways and provide superior value to customers (Saito et al. The future success of airlines will be largely dependent on how quickly and flexibly airlines respond to both competitive and market changes (Franke. Its CEO heads the special committee tasked with transforming MAS’s corporate culture and sends emails to employees in his effort to communicate his new vision for the company’s culture. AirAsia’s informal team culture also helps organizational members to bond. Through the integration of knowledge management system and customer relationship management system. ICT will assist airlines in enhancing their transaction-data processing. This includes setting up a formal whistle-blowing policy. since its takeover. 2006). which according to Nonaka (1994). chat rooms. in the current climate of continuous change and uncertainty. and expertise location applications for example. ICT will help airlines to automate and streamline processes to reduce complexity and costs as well as to provide greater convenience to the transportation of passengers and freight. memos and bulletin boards to breakdown communication barriers.0 STRATEGIES FOR THE FUTURE USE OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT Effective implementation and application of KM among organizations are critical in the current knowledge-based economy. 2007). AirAsia has always practiced open management and provides above average industry disclosure (AirAsia.with other airlines MAS has established a well-balanced network that covers all of its key markets and this has had a direct positive impact on its bottom line. to make better informed decisions. trust. ICT will support both codification and personalization knowledge management strategy which it is used to create. The firm’s unique knowledge provides the main source of its competitive advantage.. Acknowledging this. MAS and AirAsia are using their intranet and other informal communication channels such as email. MAS has stressed on open and honest communication. New knowledge (especially strategies) has to develop regularly in order to stay competitive in the industry. improve customer-based knowledge and value-driven relationship building. 2006). 2007). flatter organization structures and supportive information systems are evident in the corporate culture of both airlines and according to Al-Alawi et al. cross-functional business committee teams. store and disseminate knowledge to organization members and other authorized parties. constant communication and disclosure of business plans to employees. 4. capture. airlines face critical problems and serious challenges (Doganis. This will enable employees to locate a network 18 . Communication.

and their major contributions come from their abilities to process and apply knowledge and information (McFarlane. finds ways to meet that need (knowledge abstract). and learning from direct experiences. Organizational learning is vital as airlines seek to acquire new knowledge and upgrade their core competences in order to give them competitive advantage over rivals. Acquiring knowledge workers is also the core factor for airlines to achieve and sustain competitive advantage. 2007b). Successful KM leaders like BP use the framework to capture lessons before. Promising technologies like radio-frequency identification (RFID) when realized will also bring significant improvements to FSC’s baggage handling system (MAS. This can be achieved through many means such as acquiring more knowledge workers. organizational learning must be carefully charted and be given a strategic perspective by knowledge experts such as a Chief Knowledge Officer (CKO). In order to fully capitalize on the vast amount of knowledge captured within their knowledge repositories. shares and distributes the knowledge (knowledge diffusion) as well as regularly monitoring and accessing the necessity of new knowledge development. 2008). The learning process can be supported by simple process tools embedded within the company’s intranet with lessons arising from the learning loop agreed and distilled by a community of peers across the organization that has a stake in agreeing and defining organizational best practice (SAIC. corporate intelligence. ICT based knowledge management system needs to be combined with learning from direct experience. for strategically important knowledge to be distributed rapidly around organizations. strategic alliances. local airlines need to assign dedicated experts such as a CKO to leverage organization-wide knowledge. In order to achieve this. The creation of a CKO position also sends an important signal to 19 . the asset management solution is a knowledge sharing program which has a series of repositories that contains intellectual capital. Continued advancements in pricing and revenue optimization system will help airlines to maintain their competitiveness and increase their profit margin. It is highly useful for airlines to adopt a learning cycle framework which combines both active and passive stages of learning. However. e-learning. The CKO identifies the organization’s knowledge needs (knowledge sourcing). and discussion forums that all support the business and provides a place for staff to access and retrieve knowledge. identifies and refines various ideas and principles into specific outcomes (knowledge conversion). In short. This however will not truly give airlines the competitive advantage that they seek from their learning processes. 2007).of experts to collaborate with or get help from better informed people to solve business problems or form communities of practice. Another ICT device. knowledge sharing. where they represent a living focus for the company’s experience around strategic and operational areas (SAIC. the learning process will help organizations to learn more effectively.. achieve competitive advantage. 2008). during and after any event (Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). communication and collaboration technologies like video conferencing and groupware will assist knowledge creation at the group level (Saito et al. benchmarking. training and development. Both specific and generic lessons are then incorporated into special folders on the corporate intranet. key resources. 2008). Knowledge workers are value creators and value adders to organizations. 2008) to create distinctive advantage for organizations and thus. According to Honey and Mumford (1989).

meetings. 2004) and to ensure continued organizational effectiveness. 1999). 2002). 2002). processed and disseminated to the right people. This can be done through various means such as corporate-wide campaigns. Although the industry has been promoting a culture of transparency. focusing on the speed and manner in which information is being collected. mentoring. airlines will also need to maintain their lean. but rather as something that 20 . this can only be implemented effectively within a knowledge. Great concern has been raised regarding the protection of potential intellectual capital lost due to staff turnover (DeLong. Knowledge repositories will continue to be of importance to airlines and in the near future should include lessons learnt from best and worst practices and other relevant information. Hence future KM efforts will see the implementation of groupware that will promote greater collaborative efforts and assist in creating and supporting communities of shared interest and information need. the practice of knowledge sharing is still at an early stage. airlines need to preserve their corporate memory by capturing knowledge and facilitating the transfer of both explicit and implicit knowledge between staff (Al-Hawamdeh. and appropriate reward systems. 2006). Social networks whose features include message boards. Airlines will also be looking into how to encourage knowledge sharing within the organization and build a supportive culture to enable this. 1998). In order to ensure a knowledge sharing culture. blogs. trust and teamwork. yet important aspects of KM for the airline industry. local airlines may need to raise awareness and understanding of KM in order to reduce people’s reluctance to share their knowledge (Chowdhury. However. The amount of information created is overwhelming and the knowledge produced has become more complex and complicated. leadership by example. As most KM models are formed in the context of Western framework and management practices. employee education. and transfer organizational knowledge. which operate in an oligopoly market structure in Malaysia practice KM to support their respective competitive business and strategies. Possible KM tools and techniques to deal with this problem include the use of ICT. at the right time and right place and how airlines will best respond to such information in competitive terms. KM will continue to play a critical role in managing customer relationship and competitive intelligence (Al-Hawamdeh. MAS and AirAsia. and job profiling. learning logs.friendly organization structure with an existing strong knowledge culture. This paper discusses the basic. and podcasts will help to breakdown hierarchical barriers and promote informal communication channels. Their oblique approach to KM does not necessarily mean KM is being perceived as of low importance in the industry. This will in turn help to create. 5.0 CONCLUSION The knowledge era business environment has made businesses heavily reliant on knowledge to stay competitive in an industry.the organization that knowledge is an asset to be shared and managed (Stuller. Our literature studies concluded that generic knowledge is necessary to run the industry’s complex daily operations whereas specific knowledge is imperative for airlines’ competitive advantage. A knowledge transfer department or other infrastructure should also be considered to oversee the development and maintenance of the organization’s knowledge base (Liebowitz. coordinate. live chat rooms. flexible organization structure and motivate their people to share knowledge by rewarding those who contribute useful information into the system.

D. C. 8(1).net/ir/8-1/paper143. 9(7). Company annual report year 2007.. 21 . 143 [Available at http://InformatonR.php?story=20060727043623849 [Accessed on: 25 April 2008]. and Mohammed. knowledge utilization and knowledge capitalization. N. N. (1998). R. US. ICT has been used in innovation. AirAsia’s KM practices will need to support its expanding business besides sustaining its cost-leadership advantage in the industry. 11(2). improved modus operandi and new business development for both airlines. Malaysia. Doganis. Reading. whereas MAS will have to face challenges of its hybrid strategy of competitive pricing strategies and differentiation which may allow the market to recognize its branding efforts as a five-star value carrier. 11(1). P. AirAsia. (2004). DeLong. Similarly. 36–47. [Online]http://www. lowered the cost of operation of airlines and increased organizational efficiency. and Schon. Al-Hawamdeh. “Organizational culture and knowledge sharing: Critical success factors”. Hence the “now” and “then” gaps represent the future void that KM needs to fill today. organizational learning has led to new.net/article. The Airline Business. Meanwhile. Information Research. Journal of Knowledge Management. L. Addison Wesley. Routledge. “Lost knowledge: Confronting the threat of an aging workforce”.kmtalk. both airlines manage and leverage their intellectual capital to their maximum advantage. (2007).com. London. (2006). Journal of Knowledge Management. Davenport. However.H. 2007. AlMarzooqi. Christensen. Harvard Business School Press. (1978). “Building KM in Malaysia”. and Prusak. 22-42. S. 2nd ed. US. (2007).I. AirAsia.html] Chowdhury. “Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective”.. T. Oxford University Press. [Online] <www.airasia.my> [Accessed on 23 August 2008].requires gradual application and implementation by systematically incorporating KM tools and techniques into their existing stage of business. “Knowledge management: Re-thinking intellectual management and facing the challenge of managing tacit knowledge”.F. which in turn has produced unique business strategies. REFERENCES Airasia (2007). A. Al-Alawi. Y. “Knowledge sharing: moving away from the obsession with best Practice”.W. (2002). with the challenging road ahead in the airline industry there is an increasing need to maintain competitive advantage and to progress beyond the industry’s current state of KM. D. “Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know”.Y. Inside Knowledge. knowledge development. US. Argyris.H. paper no. (2006).

P (Ed. Faculty of Economics and Commerce. (2005). (2000). Australia. (1994).).com/articl150.malaysiaairlines. Nonaka. 9(1). McFarlane. The Learning Organization. (2001). “Overcoming cultural barriers to sharing knowledge”. M. M. J. 259-272. (1991). “AirAsia. D. <cms. 184-194. Ardingly House. C. 76-85. 79(3). 22 .. Journal of Air Transport Management. (1989). S.H. “Strategy and the Internet”. Journal of Air Transport Management.malaysiaairlines. Pemberton. C. 7(4). MAS. P.F.Strategic IT initiative”. Business turnaround plan. 1898-1980.A. [Online] <www. Aruan. and Mumford. Effectively managing the 21st century knowledge worker.A. CRC Press. 96-104. (1999). (2005).com/papers/AA_SITA. Tjitrahardja. MAS. Kho.H.aspx>. Organisational learning and knowledge assets – an essential partnership. New York. 62-78. [Accessed on: 25 April 2008]. 42. Administrative Science Quarterly. “Competition between network carriers and low-cost carriers-retreat battle or breakthrough to a new level of efficiency”. R.com/mys/eng/about_us/investor_relations/MAS [Accessed on: 25 April 2008]. A. 11(4). Knowledge management handbook.com/getfile/78aa4d9c-4963-40838063be16e50d4b5a/BTP2. AirAsia and Malaysia Airlines”. and Narayanaswamy. R. and O’Dell. “The Manual of Learning Opportunities”. Harvard Business Review.pdf -> MAS 2007b. G. and Stonehouse. 14-36. 10(1) 1521. [Online Way_F. (1997). I. J.tlainc. Ingram. J. “A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation”. O’Connell. Honey. 5(1). G. P.Franke. MAS 2007. “Knowledge-creating company”. “Chain affiliation and the failure of Manhattan hotels”. [Online] <http://sandygarink. [Accessed on: 24 April 2008] Liebowitz. 69(6). C.D. (2008). Journal of Knowledge Management Practice. “Passengers perception of low cost airlines and full service carriers: A case study involving Ryanair.htm> [accessed on 24 Sept 2008]. and Baum. and Williams. (2004). Nonaka. University of Melbourne. Maidenhead.C. McDermott. I. Honey. (2001). Porter. Organization Science.pdf>. Journal of Knowledge Management. Aer Lingus. Business transformation plan. J. [Online] <www. 5(1). 68-102. Harvard Business Review.E.tripod.

Ricart. M. J. T. Journal of Knowledge Management. Telecommunications convergence. K.uk/articles/features/0. How to use social networks for business gains?.kmworld. Lecture slides. London. J. (2005). “Chief of corporate smarts”. University of Abertay Dundee. S. P. A. and Wang. A. Taylor. “Now everyone can fly: AirAsia” Asian Journal of Management Cases. J.39290463-3. 97. 35(4). 184-193. Petroleum.1000002000. (2006).D. [Accessed on 10 May 2008] Saito. KM & British <http://www.zdnet. and Pemberton. (2008).A. Umemoto. Whittle. 7(4). KM World [Online] http://www. Stuller. UK. G. 231-255.Powers. Stonehouse. (2007).saic.com 2008..html>. “A strategy based ontology of knowledge management based technologies”. 2(2). 11(1). NewYork.com/km/who. McGraw-Hill. The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. 28-37.00. (1992).H. V. (1997). SAIC. “IBM’s KM Strategy”. Century Business.111.htm?r=1 [Accessed: 10 May 2008] 23 . London: Nicholas Brealey Stewart. and Ikeda. Training. Stewart. (2000).aspx?ArticleID=16907&PageNum=2> [Accessed on: 19 April 2008].co. Zdnet http://resources. Senge. (1998). The Learning Organization. D. Shepard.E. (1999). S. Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth of Organisations. “Organizational learning and knowledge assets”.com/Articles/ReadArticle. (2007).

5 April 2005) 24 .Appendix 1 (Centre for Asia Pacific Aviation.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful