Critical Analysis of Knowledge Management Maturity Models
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36311/1981-1640.2024.v18.e024038Keywords:
Knowledge Management, Maturity Models, Knowledge Managemente Maturity Model, Organizational Knowlegde Assessment, Asian Productivity OrganizationAbstract
Assuming that organizations need to identify their knowledge management maturity levels before implementing such management, this study aims to critically analyze the main knowledge management maturity models found in the Information Science literature. The goal is to contribute to the selection of the most suitable maturity model for each organization at a given moment. To this end, the guiding concepts of knowledge management are presented, with emphasis on maturity models, which are tools used to evaluate existing knowledge management activities within an organization. As a methodology, a bibliographic review was conducted on the concepts under study, allowing the identification of the main maturity models to be analyzed and compared. Regarding the results, it is highlighted that the presentation, analysis, and comparison of the maturity models enable the identification of different contexts in which they should be applied. In conclusion, it is emphasized that the Knowledge Management Maturity Model is recommended when external support is sought; the application of the Organizational Knowledge Assessment tends to be simpler and more straightforward, besides being free of charge; and the model of the Asian Productivity Organization offers a more complex and comprehensive approach, including a well-structured evaluation methodology. Additionally, it is concluded that for organizations to effectively implement knowledge management and benefit from it, they must identify their maturity level in terms of this management. This should be done using a maturity model, and it is further highlighted that among various models, there is one best suited for each organization.
Downloads
References
Asian Productivity Organization (APO). ‘’Knowledge management: Case studies for small and medium enterprises.’’ Japan: Asian Productivity Organization, 2009.
Barreto, Alice Medeiros. "Maturidade de gestão do conhecimento: um estudo comparativo entre o Organizational Knowledge Assessment (OKA) e o Knowledge Management Maturity Model (KMMM)". Negócios em projeção 6.2 (2015): 13-23.
Castillo, Lucio Abimael Medrano, and Edson Walmir Cazarini. "Modelo integrado para a implantação da gestão do conhecimento”. Revista Gestão da Produção Operações e Sistemas 4 (2009): 61-61.
Chiavenato, Idalberto. Administração Geral e Pública. Elsevier Brasil, 2008.
Choo, Chun Wei. "The knowing organization: How organizations use information to construct meaning, create knowledge and make decisions”. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.
Silva Junior, Annor da, Caio Eduardo de Guido Polizel, and Priscilla de Oliveira Martins da Silva. "Fatores críticos de sucesso para a gestão do conhecimento em uma instituição de educação superior privada". Revista Brasileira de Gestão de Negócios-RBGN 14.42 (2012): 102-122.
Dalkir, Kimiz. Knowledge management in theory and practice. routledge, 2013.
Damian, Ieda Pelógia Martins, and María Manuela Moro Cabero. "Diretrizes estratégicas baseadas nos fatores Críticos de sucesso da gestão do conhecimento voltadas às características da memória organizacional". Informação & Sociedade 30.2 (2020).
Davenport, Thomas H., and Laurence Prusak. Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know. Harvard Business Press, 1998.
Ehms, Karsten, and Manfred Langen. "Holistic development of knowledge management with KMMM”. Siemens AG 1 (2002).
Fonseca, Ana Flávia. "Organizational knowledge assessment methodology”. Washington, DC: World Bank (2006).
Gil, Antônio Carlos. Gestão de pessoas: enfoque nos papéis profissionais. São Paulo: Atlas, 2007.
Hoffmann, Wanda Aparecida Machado. "Gestão do conhecimento: aprender e compartilhar”. São Carlos: EdUFSCar, 2012.
Humphrey, Watts S. "Characterizing the software process: a maturity framework”. IEEE software 5.2 (1988): 73-79.
Junges, F. M. "Gestão do conhecimento e a geração de vantagem competitiva sustentável em organizações intensivas em conhecimento: Um estudo do setor de TI do Rio Grande do Sul”. Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos, São Leopoldo (2010).
Loth, Adriana Falcão, et al. "Aplicação do framework de Gestão do Conhecimento APO: o caso da startup T5 tecnologia”. Anais do Congresso Internacional de Conhecimento e Inovação–ciki. Vol. 1. No. 1. 2019.
NAIR, Praba, and Kamlesh PRAKASH. "Knowledge Management: facilitator’s guide”. APO: Tokyo (2009): 105-209.
Nonaka, Ikujiro, and Takeuchi, Hirotaka. Gestão do Conhecimento. Bookman, 2008.
Pérez-Montoro Gutiérrez, M. Gestión del conocimiento en las organizaciones: fundamentos, metodología y praxis. Gijón; Trea, 260p., 2008.
Pinheiro, Juliana. “Modelos de GC: Modelos KMMM”. Sociedade Brasileira de Gestão do Conhecimento (SBGC), 18 Jun 2020. Accessado 8 Ago. 2024.
Pizzaia, Ângela, et al. "O papel da comunicação na gestão do conhecimento: aspectos relevantes e estímulo a novas pesquisas”. Perspectivas em gestão & conhecimento 8.2 (2018): 62-81.
Saraph, Jayant V., P. George Benson, and Roger G. Schroeder. "An instrument for measuring the critical factors of quality management”. Decision sciences 20.4 (1989): 810-829
Valentim, Marta Lígia Pomim. "Gestão da Informação e Gestão do Conhecimento em ambientes organizacionais: conceitos e compreensões”. Tendências da Pesquisa Braileira em Ciência da Informação 1.1 (2008).
Wiig, Karl M. Knowledge management foundations: thinking about thinking-how people and organizations represent, create, and use knowledge. Schema, 1993.
Wong, Kuan Yew. "Critical success factors for implementing knowledge management in small and medium enterprises”. Industrial management & Data systems 105.3 (2005): 261-279.
Zanuzzi, Cinthya Mônica da Silva, et al. "Análise da Maturidade de Gestão do Conhecimento de uma Organização que Atua na Área de Sanidade Animal”. Anais do Congresso Internacional de Conhecimento e Inovação–ciki. v. 1. n. 1. 2018.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Mateus Silva Lorenção, Ieda Pelógia Martins Damian
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
When submitting an article, the authors retain the copyright of the article, giving full rights to the Brazilian Journal of Information Science to publish the text.
The author(s) agree that the article, if editorially accepted for publication, shall be licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0) Readers/users are free to: - Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format - Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially. The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms. Under the following terms: - Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. - ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original. No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits. Notices: - You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation. - No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.