This chapter gave a recapped of this entire study beginning from chapter one through chapter two and three. The chapter’s first part provided conclusions based on the research results.
The later part of the chapter covered research implications, research limitations, suggestions for future research and finally, some suggestions for the authorities of University of The Gambia.
Conclusions
The purposes of this study were to explore how the good practices of organizational knowledge sharing was being influenced by reward, trust, information and communication technology and leadership at The Gambia’s only public university called University of The Gambia (UTG) as well as to contribute to the limited literature on knowledge sharing in universities. This final chapter therefore, provided conclusions and suggestions for the University of The Gambia’s management as well as for those intending to pursue a similar study in the future.
These conclusions and recommendations were based on the results of this study.
Knowledge sharing (KS) as a component of knowledge management (KM) is a very valuable practice that most organizations both private and public continue to initiate and implement. More and more institutions are embracing it because of the fruitful results that the practice continue to produce. Results of lot of studies indicated that most organizations that are doing well in terms of organizational performance are the ones that encourage knowledge sharing practice. Through knowledge sharing, the organization utilizes the tacit knowledge of the various individual employees thereby giving them that competitive advantage above their competitors.
However, there was ample literature that stated that there are certain factors that do facilitate or hinder this good organizational practice for both those successful organizations that are renowned for it as well as those that intend to adapt the practice. The factors that were hypothesized as being influential on organizational knowledge sharing included: Rewards, Trust, Information and Communication Technology and Leadership.
Four hypothesis were developed for this study. Each hypothesis was developed based on each of the four independent variables of Reward, Trust, Information and Communication Technology and Leadership and how they impacted on knowledge sharing in University of The Gambia.
54
The results manifested that three of the hypothesis that were based on Reward, Trust and Leadership, were supported. However, out of the three, Trust has the strongest significant effect on Knowledge sharing at University of The Gambia, followed by Leadership and Reward. The results did not indicate any significant effect of Information and Communication Technology on Knowledge Sharing.
Research Implications
This research on Knowledge Sharing about The Gambia’s only public university, to the knowledge of the researcher, was the first of its kind. As a result, the study’s result revealed the factors that promote knowledge sharing among staff at University of The Gambia. As such, the management that is responsible for the day to day administration of the university as well as the Governing council can put in place strong policies and plans that will support and strengthen those factors.
Based on the revelations of this research results, the implications were viewed from two perspectives of theoretical and practical. First and foremost, from the theoretical perspective, it revealed that strong commitment towards building trust is a prerequisite for knowledge sharing.
For knowledge sharing to significantly thrive in any institution or organization of any nature, the relationship between and among its staff should be formulated, built and strengthen on trust. Like most of the research results that focused on organizational knowledge sharing, this research too indicated that trust is a fundamental pillar in the promotion of knowledge sharing. Secondly, based on the theoretical perspective, this research also highlighted that factors that affect knowledge sharing in an institution might depend on the method of sharing, country, institution or even the type of people. This is because the extensive review on literature regarding the significance of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) on knowledge sharing, all corroborated the perception that it indeed has a great significance on knowledge sharing. However, this study’s result regarding ICT’s significance on KS completely contradicted those research findings. This could be associated to the fact that the dominant method of KS in University of The Gambia is through face to face instead of through electronics or the utilization of Information and communication Technology. The contradiction of this research result and that of the previous ones could be because those researches focused on institutions in countries that are well developed than The Gambia and University of The Gambia in particular, economically, and infrastructural and
55
resource wise. Also, the social aspects of these people might as well have variations. UTG authorities could still therefore, proceed and establish vibrant internet infrastructure and steady internet facilities so as to ease its availability and accessibility. This will be very useful in contemporary university environment as more and more universities both in the developed and developing nations continue to initiate, implement or strengthen the already established Information and Communication Technology that facilitates and promotes knowledge sharing among faculty and administrative staff.
Furthermore, strong leadership support and reward system can be very instrumental in motivating University of The Gambia’s staff towards the practice of knowledge sharing. In other words, they are great influencers of organizational knowledge sharing. Therefore, paving the way for organizational knowledge sharing should be initiated and supported by the leadership. Meaning that every facility, equipment and resources that are vital and facilitate knowledge sharing process should be readily provided by the management. In the same vein, the leadership’s inclination and overall behavior towards the practice of knowledge sharing in University of The Gambia serve as great determinants and rudiments towards its success. If their attitude is that of a positive one towards knowledge sharing, then all their subordinates will certainly cultivate and follow that particular path. In addition, rewards, be it remuneration or recognition or monetary or non-monetary can greatly influence and motivate the staff towards knowledge sharing practices. When staff are well paid, and their efforts are well recognized and appreciated, they are self-motivated to share their knowledge. A conducive knowledge sharing environment has a supportive and effective rewards system that it is linked to. To conclude, monetary and non-monetary rewards are both vital for a prosperous knowledge sharing practices. However, University of The Gambia’s management should be aware of collaboration and best practices of sharing as well as be considerate while trying to design a vibrant reward system.
Limitations
There are indeed other universities in The Gambia even though they are private, but this research wholly focused on the University of The Gambia as the only public university. Like any other genuine endeavor or study, this study too had its limitations. This was due to the nature of the research and was also meant to help control the scope of the study. In other words, at some level, its limitation also anchored on the research purpose, which was to explore how reward, trust,
56
information and communication technology and leadership either promote or hinder knowledge sharing in university of The Gambia. Again, the other limitation was the focus was on the faculty staff and it did not include auxiliary staff.
Suggestions
Based on the research findings, here are some suggestions for future research and UTG authorities.
For Further/ Future Research
To the knowledge of the researcher, this research being the first of its kind regarding knowledge sharing in University of The Gambia, others might be interested to conduct similar future research. As such, based on the results of this study, suggestions for such future studies are given herein.
Firstly, future research might try to focus or give a consideration of the type of knowledge that is being shared. Secondly, future studies can also be done by focusing on comparing the level of knowledge sharing among the various schools in University of The Gambia. This might bring into limelight the level and intentions of knowledge sharing in the various schools of University of The Gambia. And finally, a future study might also look into the potential differences or similarities of knowledge sharing between UTG as the only public university in The Gambia and the few available private universities.
For UTG Authorities
Literature review on institutional knowledge Management and Knowledge Sharing revealed that Knowledge Sharing practice is one of the best organizational practices that every organization is promoting. This is as a result of its fruitful contribution towards an institution’s progress and prosperity. This practice should even be more encouraged in universities or learning institutions because they are seen as the centres of knowledge creation, management and sharing.
Therefore, based on the results of this study, the researcher gave some recommendations to the authorities of University of The Gambia. To begin with, UTG management should always lead by example in terms of showing positive attitude towards encouraging knowledge sharing, and should also always be ready to provide support in terms of the provisions of equipment and facilities that enhance knowledge sharing. This will encourage the rest of the staff to follow suit.
Moreover, they should also ensure that there is proper reward mechanism. These include both
57
monetary and recognition aspects. Meaning the staff should be well paid. Similarly, committed and dedicated staff can also be recognized even if there is going to be an annual event where they will be awarded with gifts or certificates of appreciation to acknowledge their contributions towards knowledge sharing. This will serve as source of motivation for the rest of the staff.
In short, for the staff to continue to unreservedly share their knowledge, the leadership should initiate and implement supportive knowledge sharing culture and practices that will positively aid and influence their attitudes towards this good practice.
58
REFERENCES
Ahmad, N., & Daghfous, A. (2010). Knowledge sharing through inter-organizational knowledge networks: Challenges and opportunities in the United Arab Emirates.European Business Review,22(2), 153-174.
Al-Alawi, A. I., Al-Marzooqi, N. Y., & Mohammed, Y. F. (2007). Organizational culture and knowledge sharing: Critical success factors. Journal of Knowledge Management, 11(2), 22-42.
Alvesson, M., & Kärreman, D. (2001). Odd couple: Making sense of the curious concept of knowledge management. Journal of Management Studies, 38(7), 995-1018.
Andrews, K. M., & Delahaye, B. L. (2000). Influences on knowledge processes in organizational learning: The psychosocial filter.Journal of Management Studies,37(6), 797-810.
Awad, E. M., & Ghaziri, H. M. (2004). Knowledge management. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
Bakker, M., Leenders, R. T. A., Gabbay, S. M., Kratzer, J., & Van Engelen, J. M. (2006). Is trust really social capital? Knowledge sharing in product development projects. The Learning Organization, 13(6), 594-605.
Boateng, H., & Agyemang, F. G. (2016). A qualitative insight into key determinants of
knowledge sharing in a public sector institution in Ghana. Information Development, 32(1), 35-43.
Bock, G. W., Zmud, R. W., Kim, Y. G., & Lee, J. N. (2005). Behavioral intention formation in knowledge sharing: Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological forces, and organizational climate. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 87-111.
Bratton, J., & Gold, J. (1994). Human Resource Management. doi: 3_1
Breen, R., Lindsay, R., Jenkins, A., & Smith, P. (2001). The role of information and
communication technologies in a university learning environment. Studies in Higher Education, 26(1), 95-114.
Cabrera, A., Collins, W. C., & Salgado, J. F. (2006). Determinants of individual engagement in knowledge sharing. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 17(2), 245-264.
Chemers, M. M. (1997). An integrative theory of leadership. New Jersey: Laurence Erlbaum Associates.
59
Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modelling. Modern Methods for Business Research, 295(2), 295-336.
Connelly, C. E., & Kelloway, E. Kevin (2003). Predictors of employees' perceptions of knowledge sharing cultures. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 24(5), 294-301.
Cook, S. D., & Yanow, D. (1993). Culture and organizational learning. Journal of Management Inquiry, 2(4), 373-390.
Davenport, T. H., Grover, V. (2001). General perspectives on knowledge management: Fostering a research agenda. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 5-21.
Davenport, T. H., & Prusak, L. (1998). Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press.
Davenport, T. H., & Prusak, L. (2000). Working knowledge: How organizations know what they know. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
David, W., & Fahey, L. (2000). Diagnosing cultural barriers to knowledge management. The Academy of Management Executive, 14(4), 113-127.
De Jong, J. P., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2007). How leaders influence employees' innovative behaviour. European Journal of Innovation Management, 10(1), 41-64.
Debowski, S. (2006). Knowledge Management. Australia: John Wiley & Sons Limited.
Disterer, G. (2001). Individual and social barriers to knowledge transfer. Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Maui, HI,USA, 34, 1-7.
Dodgson, M. (1993). Organizational learning: A review of some literatures. Organization Studies, 14(3), 375-394.
Fornell, C., Lorange, P., & Roos, J. (1990). The cooperative venture formation process: A latent variable structural modeling approach. Management Science, 36(10), 1246-1255.
Fullwood, R., Rowley, J., & Delbridge, R. (2013). Knowledge sharing amongst academics in UK universities. Journal of Knowledge Management, 17(1), 123-136.
Goh, S. C. (2002). Managing effective knowledge transfer: An integrative framework and some practice implications. Journal of Knowledge Management, 6(1), 23-30.
Gold, A. H., & Malhotra, A. H. S. (2001). Knowledge management: An organizational capabilities perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 185-214.
Gray, C., & Kinnear, P. (2012). IBM SPSS statistics 19 made simple. New York: Psychology Press.
60
Gupta, A. K., & Govindarajan, V. (2000). Knowledge flows within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 21(4), 473-496.
Hargadon, A. B. (1998). Firms as knowledge brokers: Lessons in pursuing continuous innovation. California Management Review, 40(3), 209-227.
Healey, J, F. (2008). Statistics: A tool for social research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Pub.
Hendriks, P. (1999). Why share knowledge? The influence of ICT on the motivation for knowledge sharing. Knowledge and Process Management, 6(2), 91.
Hislop, D. (2009). Organizational culture and knowledge management. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Retrieved from: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com
Hsu, I. C. (2008). Knowledge sharing practices as a facilitating factor for improving organizational performance through human capital: A preliminary test. Expert Systems with
Applications, 35(3), 1316-1326.
Huber, G. P. (1991). Organizational learning: The contributing processes and the literatures. Organization Science, 2(1), 88-115.
Huysman, M., & Wulf, V. (2006). IT to support knowledge sharing in communities, towards a social capital analysis. Journal of Information Technology, 21(1), 40-51.
Ipe, M. (2003). Knowledge sharing in organizations: A conceptual framework. Human Resource Development Review, 2(4), 337-359.
Islam, Z. M., Hasan, I., Ahmed, S. U., & Ahmed, S. M. (2011). Organizational culture and knowledge sharing: Empirical evidence from service organizations. African Journal of Business Management, 5(14), 5900-5909.
Ismail, M. B., & Yusof, Z. M. (2008). Factors affecting knowledge sharing in public organizations in Malaysia. Proceedings of the Knowledge Management International Conference and Exhibitions (KMICe), Malaysia, 165-171.
Issa, R. R., & Haddad, J. (2008). Perceptions of the impacts of organizational culture and information technology on knowledge sharing in construction. Construction Innovation, 8(3), 182-201.
Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Staples, D. S. (2001). Exploring perceptions of organizational ownership of information and expertise. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 151-183.
Kalleberg, A. L. (1977). Work values and job rewards: A theory of job satisfaction. American Sociological Review, 42(1), 124-143.
61
Kreiner, K. (2002). Tacit knowledge management: The role of artifacts. Journal of Knowledge Management, 6(2), 112-123.
Lai, M. F., & Lee, G. G. (2007). Relationships of organizational culture toward knowledge activities. Business Process Management Journal, 13(2), 306-322.
Lee, C. K., & Al-Hawamdeh, S. (2002). Factors impacting knowledge sharing. Journal of Information & Knowledge Management, 1(1), 49-56.
Lee, H., & Choi, B. (2003). Knowledge management enablers, processes, and organizational performance: An integrative view and empirical examination. Journal of Management Information Systems, 20(1), 179-228.
Leonard-Barton, D. (1995). Wellsprings of knowledge: Building and sustaining the sources of innovation. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Levin, D. Z., & Cross, R. (2004). The strength of weak ties you can trust: The mediating role of trust in effective knowledge transfer. Management Science, 50(11), 1477-1490.
Levin, D. Z., Cross, R., Abrams, L. C., & Lesser, E. L. (2002). Trust and knowledge sharing: A critical combination. IBM Institute for Knowledge-Based Organizations, 10(2) 1-19.
Lin, H. F. (2007). Knowledge sharing and firm innovation capability: An empirical study. International Journal of Manpower, 28(3/4), 315-332.
Lin, H. F., & Lee, G. G. (2004). Perceptions of senior managers toward knowledge-sharing behaviour. Management Decision, 42(1), 108-125.
MacNeil, C. M. (2004). Exploring the supervisor role as a facilitator of knowledge sharing in teams. Journal of European Industrial Training, 28(1), 93-102.
Marwick, A. D. (2001). Knowledge management technology. IBM Systems Journal, 40(4), 814-830.
Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1990). A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, correlates, and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychological Bulletin, 108(2), 171-179.
McAdam, R., & Reid, R. (2000). A comparison of public and private sector perceptions and use of knowledge management. Journal of European Industrial Training, 24(6), 317-329.
McDermott, R., & O'dell, C. (2001). Overcoming cultural barriers to sharing knowledge. Journal of Knowledge Management, 5(1), 76-85.
McNiel, D. S. (2006). Meeting through narrative: A personal narrative discussing growing up with an alcoholic mother (Master’s thesis). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and
62 Theses database. (UMI No. 1434728)
Metaxiotis, K., & Psarras, J. (2003). Applying knowledge management in higher education: The creation of a learning organisation. Journal of Information & Knowledge
Management, 2(4), 353-359.
Mikulecky, P., & Mikulecka, J. (1999). Active Tools for Better Knowledge Dissemination. Paper presented at the American Society for Information Science Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C.
Mooradian, T., Renzl, B., & Matzler, K. (2006). Who trusts? Personality, trust and knowledge sharing. Management Learning, 37(4), 523-540.
Mottaz, C. J. (1988). Determinants of organizational commitment. Human Relations, 41(6), 467-482.
Neuman, W. (2014). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (7th ed.).
London: Pearson.
Nidumolu, S. R., & Subramani, M., & Aldrich, A. (2001). Situated learning and the situated knowledge web: Exploring the ground beneath knowledge management. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 115-150.
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford university press.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York, USA: McGraw-Hill.
O'dell, C., & Grayson, C. J. (1998). If only we knew what we know: Identification and transfer of internal best practices. California Management Review, 40(3), 154-174.
Oliver, S., & Kandadi, K. R. (2006). How to develop knowledge culture in organizations? A multiple case study of large distributed organizations. Journal of Knowledge
Management, 10(4), 6-24.
Pan, S. L., & Scarbrough, H. (1999). Knowledge management in practice: An exploratory case study. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 11(3), 359-374.
Reid, F. (2003). Creating a knowledge-sharing culture among diverse business units. Employment Relations Today, 30(3), 43-49.
Riege, A. (2005). Three-dozen knowledge-sharing barriers managers must consider. Journal of Knowledge Management, 9(3), 18-35.
63
Rowley, J. (2000). Is higher education ready for knowledge management? International Journal of Educational Management, 14(7), 325-333.
Schippers, M. C., Den Hartog, D. N., & Koopman, P. L. (2001, August). Reflexivity in teams:
The relation with trust, group potency, team leadership, and performance in work teams.
Paper presented at the Academy of Management, Washington, D.C.
Schoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (2007). An integrative model of organizational trust: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 344-354.
Shockley-Zalabak, P., Ellis, K., & Cesaria, R. (2003). Measuring organizational trust: Cross-cultural survey and index. Retrieved from http://store. yahoo. com/iabcstore/measortrus
Sohail, M. S. &. Daud S. (2009). Knowledge sharing in higher education institutions:
Perspectives from Malaysia. Vine, 39(2), 125-142.
Søndergaard, S., Kerr, M., & Clegg, C. (2007). Sharing knowledge: Contextualizing socio-technical thinking and practice. The Learning Organization, 14(5), 423-435.
Spender, J. C. (1996). Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(2), 45-62.
Syed-Ikhsan, S. O. S., & Rowland, F. (2004). Knowledge management in a public organization:
A study on the relationship between organizational elements and the performance of knowledge transfer. Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(2), 95-111.
Tippins, M. J. (2003). Implementing knowledge management in academia: Teaching the teachers. International Journal of Educational Management, 17(7), 339-345.
Trice, H. M., & Beyer, J. M. (1993). The cultures of work organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Tsoukas, H., & Vladimirou, E. (2001). What is organizational knowledge? Journal of Management Studies, 38(7), 973-993.
University of The Gambia. (2016). Conditions of service for staff at University of The Gambia.
Faraba Banta Campus: University of The Gambia Printing Office.
Van den Brink, P. (2003). Social, organizational, and technological conditions that enable knowledge sharing (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology, Holland.
Van den Hooff, B., Elving, W., Meeuwsen, J. M., & Dumoulin, C. (2003). Knowledge sharing in knowledge communities. In M. Huysman, E. Wenger, & V. Wulf (Eds.), Communities and Technologies (pp. 119-141). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer Links.
64
Varun Grover, T. H. D. (2001). General perspectives on knowledge management: Fostering a research agenda. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 5-21.
Walczak, S. (2005). Organizational knowledge management structure. The Learning Organization, 12(4), 330-339.
Wang, S., & Noe, R. A. (2010). Knowledge sharing: A review and directions for future research. Human Resource Management Review, 20(2), 115-131.
Wenger, E. C., & Snyder, W. M. (2000). Communities of practice: The organizational frontier. Harvard Business Review, 78(1), 139-146.
Williamson, I. O., Burnett, M. F., & Bartol, K. M. (2009). The interactive effect of collectivism and organizational rewards on affective organizational commitment. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, 16(1), 28-43.
Yang, J. T. (2004). Job-related knowledge sharing: Comparative case studies. Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(3), 118-126.
Yang, J. T. (2007). The impact of knowledge sharing on organizational learning and effectiveness. Journal of Knowledge Management, 11(2), 83-90.
Yang, J. T. (2007). The impact of knowledge sharing on organizational learning and effectiveness. Journal of Knowledge Management, 11(2), 83-90.