KNOWLEDGE

MANAGEMENT IN
INDIAN
INDUSTRIES
Presented by – Harshad Vinay Savant (PHD01003)
Presented to – Prof. Vishnuprasad Nagadevara
INTRODUCTION
 Authors - Deepak Chawla and Himanshu Joshi

 Published in – Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 14 No. 5, 2010

 Google Scholar Citations – 83

 Keywords - Knowledge management, Manufacturing systems, Communication technologies,

Electric power generation, India
 Purpose –

The purpose of this paper is to study Knowledge Management (KM) implementation in Indian
manufacturing, IT and IT Enabled Services (ITES) and power generation and distribution
companies. Various dimensions of KM, namely: process, leadership, culture, technology, and
measurement are compared across the three industries to understand the differences in KM practices.
CONT….
 Design/methodology/approach –

Samples comprised 17 responses from ITES, 32 from manufacturing and eight from power
generation and distribution organizations. Convenient sampling scheme was used. The paper reports
the findings of the difference in KM practices with respect to the organizations’ use of the above
mentioned dimensions across the three industries.
 Findings –

The raw mean score of various dimensions for ITES is the highest followed by manufacturing, and
power generation and distribution on all except the leadership dimension. However, one way
ANOVA results indicate that no significant difference is found for KM process, culture and
technology. Statistical difference is found on the remaining two dimensions, namely, leadership and
measurement, which are further analyzed.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
 In this study, a structured questionnaire, Knowledge Management Assessment Tool (KMAT,1995)
developed by the American Productivity and Quality Center and Arthur Anderson, is used.
 The KMAT tool consists of 24 questions, divided into five sections namely Knowledge Management
Process, Leadership in Knowledge Management, Culture, Knowledge Management Technology and
Knowledge Management Measurement.
 Knowledge Management Process is divided into five items labeled P1 to P5

 Leadership in Knowledge Management is divided into four items labeled L1 to L4

 Knowledge Management Culture is divided in five items labeled C1 to C5

 Knowledge Management Techniques is divided into six items labeled as T1 to T6

 Knowledge Management Measurement is divided into four items labeled M1 to M4

CONT….
 Each of the items under the five dimension is measured on a five point Likert scale defined
as 1 = no, 2 = poor, 3 = fair, 4 = good and 5 = excellent.
 The scores of each of the items of various dimension is added to give a total score for each
dimension.
 A number of Indian companies across three industries were contacted for collecting data.
 The basis for selecting these industries is their contribution to Indian economy.
 Regular mail, e-mail, personal visits and, telephonic conversations were used to make the
respondents aware of the objectives of the study and to seek their cooperation and
participation in providing the information.
 A convenience sampling scheme was used to select the respondents.
CONT….
 About 100 organizations operating in India were contacted. A follow-up with these
organizations resulted in 16 companies finally participating in the research study giving the
primary data on the KMAT instrument.
 A sample of 57 top and middle level executives of 16 private and public sector companies
from India participated in the study.
 A total of 32 responses were received from manufacturing sector companies, 17 from IT
Enabled Services and remaining 8 from power generation and distribution.
 The manufacturing sector companies are Mahindra & Mahindra Limited, Tinplate Company of
India Limited, Tata Motors Limited, Samtel Color Limited and Tata Steel Limited.
 IT enabled service companies included Infosys Technologies Limited, Satyam Computer
Services Limited, International Business Machines (IBM) Corporation Limited, Patni
Computer Systems Limited and Aricent Inc.
 Powerlink Corporation Limited and North Delhi Private Limited are power generation and
transmission companies.
CONT….
 A reliability test was conducted on each of the five dimensions and the entire twenty four
items included in the KMAT instrument. The value of Cronbach alpha varied from 0.755 to
0.940 indicating a high degree of reliability.
 A confirmatory factor analysis was conducted for each of the dimensions of KMAT
instrument separately. The results indicated that each of the dimension resulted in only one
factors with variation being explained ranging from 51.95 percent to 70.99 percent. This
shows that the variables chosen in any dimension belong to that particular factor only.
RESULT
CONT….
KNOWLEDGE
MANAGEMENT IN
INDIAN
CONGLOMERATES
SIMILARITY TO PREVIOUS
RESEARCH
 Knowledge Management Assessment Tool (KMAT) will be used.
 Each of the items under the five dimension is measured on a five point interval scale defined
as 1 = no, 2 = poor, 3 = fair, 4 = good and 5 = excellent.
 Regular mail, e-mail, personal visits and, telephonic conversations will be used to collect
information from respondents.
 α coefficient (cronbach alpha) and confirmatory factor analysis will be used for Reliability
test.
NOTABLE DIFFERENCES
 Selection of Conglomerates –

There are more than 40 different conglomerates across India. Response from atleast 5 groups
can be expected.
Within the respondent groups, each individual company will be targeted for collection of data.
Within each company, stratified sampling will be used (not convenience sampling) to represent
each department of that organization (sample drawn as per % of individuals working for that
department).
CONT….
 Previous research using one-way ANOVA has resulted in no significant difference in 3 of the 5
sections (KM process, culture and technology) and only statistical differences in remaining
two (leadership and measurement).
 Two-way ANOVA will give significance of any inter-relation between any of the above
mentioned sections. Thus, we can determine if the 3 sections which do not have any statistical
difference are related to each other and their interaction with one another.
 Also, ANCOVA or Kruskal–Wallis H test can be used but these tests are significantly
weaker in comparison to one-way ANOVA.
THANK YOU