How Knowledge Management Drives Enterprise Strategy

By Scott Leeb

1. The most important thing I learned from the video

The video discusses the essence of data in knowledge management. It highlights that knowledge management improves organizational intelligence quotient (OIQ); a term used to describe the efficient functionality of an organization based on the data available.  Data is identified in the video as one of the key elements that drives enterprise strategy since it sits at the base of the knowledge management pyramid.  Data can be words, pictures, images, and figures that constitute the basic elements of information that eventually produces knowledge.  I learned from the video that knowledge, more or less, deals with being able to generate the right intelligence using the data available in an enterprise. The era of big data analytics makes it even more complicated as data comes in many pieces and forms.  Carrying out the rightful analytics to arrive at more intelligent data as knowledge is a strategy that an organization must be keen about in terms of mining knowledge at the right time for the right purpose.

In the video, it is mentioned that organisations need to focus on intelligence that is timely, actionable and useful for effective decision making.  This is a major decision point for me having worked in an organization that relies more on piles and piles of data and information as contents that drive decisions and strategy.  This makes it relevant to give more attention to knowledge management in order to help the users (or customers) meet their needs.  This is a lesson I will take to my organization.

2. What question is answered?

The video vividly answered the question of just data and information, and knowledge – the contents that drive enterprise strategy.  I think it is important to emphasise the importance of knowledge in organizational change as it holds the key to improving organizational intelligence quotient (OIQ), and gives room for more effective decision making processes in the long run as well as helping customers to meet their needs at all times.

List of Sources

Scott Leeb: How Knowledge Management drives enterprise strategy https://youtu.be/SvEcTEB9ajQ?t=7  (Accessed on 13. 10. 2017)

Paper Title: Content Management or Knowledge Management: Why It Matters To Customers?

Authors:  Oracle

Summary of Content of Paper

The paper discusses the importance of enterprise knowledge management in relation to customer experience.  The authors highlighted the impact of content management and knowledge management approaches to the needs of the customer and specifically mentioned that while enterprise content management is concerned with contents creation at the document level such as non-granular manuals and websites, enterprise knowledge management has its focus on the creation of snippets of knowledge including how-to instructions, procedures for troubleshooting, or answers related to specific products.  The position of the paper is in agreement with the work of Maedche et al (2003), Ndlela and Du (2001), Tiwana (2000), and Grudin (2006).  Further to this, the paper mentions that the quest for knowledge management extends from the users’ appetite for well-formed information, which is required for giving answers to numerous queries originating from daily transactions.  This is termed the findability of information, and is considered in the paper as a solution that provides a different experience with capabilities to help users locate the most-relevant knowledge.  In doing so, the paper posits that knowledge management gives room for automated and intelligence assistance in finding knowledge as also claimed by Aronson et al (2005).

A: Quality of the Research

Is the research question or objective clearly stated?

The paper raised very clear and vivid questions around enterprise content and knowledge management in relation to the customer experience, and the need to build intelligent and automated knowledge management systems to help me realising the findability of information at a granular level.  The approach to answering the questions raised is based on debating through practice, which provided for the analysis of concepts and assertions in order to realise the research objectives. The authors also placed much emphasis on case analysis to derive meaning and understanding of enterprise content and knowledge management in relation to meeting the research’s objectives.

Is the research question interesting and important?

Questions raised in the research are interesting and thought provoking in the perspective of discussing and understanding enterprise content and knowledge management, and its relevance to customers.  The relevance of the questions is also connected to the research’s aim to shed more light into the needs of customers in terms of sales and service interactions to enable companies to help users to quickly locate precise and rightful knowledge for enhancing customer experiences.

Is the work original?

The paper presented an original discuss, which considered the enterprise content and knowledge management of Oracle and its affiliates.  Citations were adequate for the work presented, and all assumptions clarified.

Is the background research clear and relevant?

The authors provided an extensive literature review, which gives the background knowledge for understanding the ideas presented in the paper.  This research background mentions the effect of information on customer experience as well as the key to successful customer experiences (Oracle 2011, pp. 3 – 5).  The paper conveys the general idea of enhancing customer experience through creating, managing, and publishing granular and non-granular information including pages and sites, snippets of knowledge, small-to-large articles related to customer inquiries, and so on.  This is in consonance with the works of Aronson et al (2005) as well as `Loucopoulos and Kavakli (1999).

Are there any ethical problems?

The work presented some ethical issues in terms of customer experiences though such issues were addressed in relation to best practices.

B: The Research Method

Summarise the research method:

The research is exploratory and through customer-based experiences in accessing contents and knowledge in the context of information findability.  The paper dwelt on the method to give credence to the ideas expressed in the work.  As discussed in Stigler et al (1999), exploratory research is pertinent in deriving meaning to a problem that has not been fully investigated, and as such is able to give an insight into the proper perspective of content and knowledge management as it affects customer experiences for an enterprise.

Does the research method seem appropriate for the research question?

The appropriateness of the research method cannot be overemphasised. This is evident in the detailed analysis given and the reference to a combination of factors in describing context and knowledge management in the context of an enterprise for assisting customers to enhance their respective experiences for sales and interactive services.

Are the methods adequately described?

The description of the methods was adequate in the context of the paper, and in relation to the stated research objectives.  Emphasis is laid on the symmetry of content and knowledge management to provide answers to users’ queries on information needs through intelligent and automated assistance throughout the search process.

Were the analyses done correctly?

The paper gave concise and vivid descriptions of customer information needs, and highlighted the relevance of customer experiences in order to fully assess the import of knowledge management for an enterprise.  The paper also gave a distinct differentiation between content and knowledge management as seen in the public domain, and gave a critical analysis of the essence of snippets of knowledge to achieving advanced search techniques such as natural language processing.

Are the conclusions supported by the data?

The conclusion given in the paper is based on the data given and used in the research, and is supported by the data.

C: Quality of Presentation

Is the work well presented?

The presentation of the work is suitable.  All elements of a well-structured paper can be found in the research.  The work is concise and portrays a high level of clarity.  However, the use of mathematical models to establish the correlation between content and knowledge management with customer experiences would have sufficed in place of descriptions.

Is the paper well structured?

The paper is well structured.  All the required details for clarity are comprehensively given, and citations of previous literatures give more credence to the structure of the work.

Are symbols, terms, and concepts adequately defined?

The paper highlighted and discussed relevant symbols, terms, and concepts adequately.  However, the use of mathematical models should have been more relevant in describing the relationship between knowledge management and customer information findability to propagate clarity in the presentation and understanding of customer experiences in enterprise-based systems.

Would additional tables, figures help to clarify the work?

The paper clearly requires more tables and figures to help in clarifying the work.  The single table and two figures used are too few for the work presented.

D: Additional Notes

The paper presented an interesting argument on content and knowledge management in relation to its relevance to customer experiences.  According to the authors, content and knowledge management systems have been in high demand in enterprises across the globe as a way of improving information findability, intelligent and automated assistance to user searchers, and the general creation, management and publishing of granular and non-granular information.  This follows that enterprise knowledge management can be enhanced through data quality, which define the granular nature of user query results in giving meaning to the information needs of customers (Loshin, 2001; McDermott, 1999). The position of the paper also agrees with the assertions of Cormican and O’Sullivan (2000) and O’Leary (1998).

 

References

O’Leary, D.E., 1998. Enterprise knowledge management. Computer, 31(3), pp.54-61.

Maedche, A., Motik, B., Stojanovic, L., Studer, R. and Volz, R., 2003. Ontologies for enterprise knowledge management. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 18(2), pp.26-33.

Tiwana, A., 2000. The knowledge management toolkit: practical techniques for building a knowledge management system. Prentice Hall PTR.

Cormican, K. and O’Sullivan, D., 2000. Enterprise knowledge management. In Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of the Irish Manufacturing Committee.

Grudin, J., 2006, January. Enterprise knowledge management and emerging technologies. In System Sciences, 2006. HICSS’06. Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on (Vol. 3, pp. 57a-57a). IEEE.

Loshin, D., 2001. Enterprise knowledge management: The data quality approach. Morgan Kaufmann.

Ndlela, L.T. and Du Toit, A.S.A., 2001. Establishing a knowledge management programme for competitive advantage in an enterprise. International journal of information management, 21(2), pp.151-165.

Loucopoulos, P. and Kavakli, V., 1999. Enterprise knowledge management and conceptual modelling. Conceptual Modeling, pp.123-143.

Aronson, J.E., Liang, T.P. and Turban, E., 2005. Decision support systems and intelligent systems. Pearson Prentice-Hall.

McDermott, R., 1999. Why information technology inspired but cannot deliver knowledge management. California management review, 41(4), pp.103-117.

Stigler, J.W., Gonzales, P., Kwanaka, T., Knoll, S. and Serrano, A., 1999. The TIMSS Videotape Classroom Study: Methods and Findings from an Exploratory Research Project on Eighth-Grade

Oracle Corporation, 2011. Content management or knowledge management: why it matters to customers. Oracle corporation world headquarters.

 

This video highlights the roles/benefits of knowledge management processes and practices in organisation

Paper Title: Information Systems Auditing: Tools and Techniques

Authors: ISACA

Summary of Content of Paper

This paper is a pointer to the importance of information systems auditing in organisations.  The paper discusses the benefits of a well-planned audit process including the effective, efficient, reliable, and secure operation of the information systems, which are pertinent to the success of an organisation.  Information systems audit and assurance as opined by Cascarino (2007), Hunton (2003), Hunton et al (2001), and Wright and Wright (2002) involve the evaluation of the management controls in an organisation to determine the extent to which an information system is in compliance with such functions as protecting the integrity of assets and meeting the goals and objectives required.  Information systems auditing comes with various tools and techniques.  These tools and techniques are discussed in ISACA (2016) are underpinned by the creation of efficient audit programs, which are designed to test controls, appraise outcomes, gain appropriate evidence to form an opinion, and report the findings to the stakeholders.  This structured approach gives relevance to information systems audit in any context within an organisation.  Furthermore, O’Donnell et al (2000) agrees that the evolution in technology especially the emergence of online business transactions has helped to improve the audit process.  However, Abu-Musa (2004) posits that the rise in the use of technology for business including the emergence of e-business pose a major challenge to external auditors in the pursuance of best practices for internal controls.  Moreso, it is not clear whether this challenge is accommodated in the position of ISACA (2016) in the discussion of the tools and techniques required for information systems auditing.

A: Quality of the Research

Is the research question or objective clearly stated?

The paper gives an insight into the need for effective audit programs for instituting internal controls in an organisation in order to monitor and enforce compliance to standards, accuracy of records, and meeting of required targets.  The objectives of the paper are clearly stated and geared towards the formal documentation of repeatable audit procedures that meet generally acceptable audit standards.

Is the research question interesting and important?

The paper highlights vividly the importance of the audit process including the questions that require answers in creating a workable audit program for an organisation.

Is the work original?

The originality of the work is evident in the structure of the paper.  All sources of information and resources used in the paper were properly documented, and terminologies extensively explained.

Is the background research clear and relevant?

The paper is characterised by a relevant background, which discusses the benefits of a well-planned audit process in an organisation.  The author mentions that the quality of the audit program has a direct impact on the audit results as well as its consistency, and emphasised the need for information system auditors to popularise the development of comprehensive audit programs for internal controls in an organisation.  This agrees with the assertions of Wright (2008), Kehoe and Tyler (1996), and Cascarino (2007).

Are there any ethical problems?

The paper presents a guide for both information systems and non-information systems audit/assurance professionals, and does not relate any ethical issues in contents and presentation.

B: The Research Method

Summarise the research method:

The research method used in the paper is exploratory.  This is evident in the structure of the argument presented.  Exploratory research method as discussed in Cooper et al (2006) is valid in the context of giving explanations to a problem that has not been studied more clearly.  Information systems auditing is becoming more and more complex due to the emergence of e-business platforms, and other related web-based transactions according to Abu-Musa (2004).  This new challenge has made it necessary to have audit guides, which highlight the required tools and techniques for a more robust approach to auditing as discussed in ISACA (2016).

Does the research method seem appropriate for the research question?

The paper is coined around appropriate research methods, which are considered adequate for the questions seeking answers.

Are the methods adequately described?

The paper gives a detailed description of its contents including the research methods recommended for the development of workable audit programs for enhancing a successful process to meets organisational goals and objectives.

Were the analyses done correctly?

The analysis is clear and vivid, and is descriptive in nature with tables and figures used to explain the basic concepts in information systems auditing including the expected inputs, outputs and audit plans for the audit programs.

Are the conclusions supported by the data?

The paper presents a succinct conclusion, which is supported by the data used in describing the entire audit process especially the task of creating audit programs for efficient internal control and the accomplishment of organisational goals.

C: Quality of Presentation

Is the work well presented?

The presentation of the work is adequate.  All elements of a well-structured paper can be found in the work.  This notwithstanding, the work is more or less a guide for information systems and non-information systems audit/assurance professionals, and does not dwell on complex scientific postulations and experimentations.

Is the paper well structured?

The structure of the paper is satisfactory though a mix-up of concepts seem to highlight repetitions in contents.  The explanations given are clear and concise as well as the step-wise process flows for developing an audit and assurance program.

Are symbols, terms, and concepts adequately defined?

The paper did not highlight many symbols.  However, the terms and concepts used are properly defined in simple terms, which makes the work of the reader easier.

Would additional tables, figures help to clarify the work?

The tables and figures used in the paper are adequate for its contents, and the use of additional tables and figures would not have conveyed more meaning than already derived from the paper.

D: Additional Notes

Information systems as discussed in Checkland (1999) are relevant in establishing the meaning of data processed and transmitted by organisations, and most importantly the semantic interpretations of these data.  This meaning cannot be complete without recourse to well-defined audit and assurance processes that create the required internal controls for meeting organisational goals and adhering to standards.  According to Cascarino (2007 and Hunton (2003), information systems auditing must check compliance to standards and evaluate management controls to keep an organisation functional and alert to all its responsibilities.  This includes the gathering of evidence, evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of internal controls with respect to the evidence gathered using audit tests, and the preparation of an audit report that highlights the grey areas, which require attention.

 

References

ISACA, 2016. Information systems auditing: Tools and Techniques. @2016 Information System Audit and Control Association Inc., ISACA

Checkland, P., 1999. Systems thinking. Rethinking management information systems, pp.45-56.

Cascarino, R.E., 2007. Auditor’s guide to information systems auditing. John Wiley & Sons.

Hunton, J.E., 2003. Core Concepts of Information Systems Auditing. John Wiley & Sons, Inc..

Kehoe, M. and Tyler, A., 1996. Information systems auditing. Social Security Journal, (Dec 1996), p.151.

O’Donnell, E., Arnold, V. and Sutton, S.G., 2000. An analysis of the group dynamics surrounding internal control assessment in information systems audit and assurance domains. Journal of Information Systems, 14(s-1), pp.97-116.

Wright, S. and Wright, A.M., 2002. Information system assurance for enterprise resource planning systems: unique risk considerations. Journal of information systems, 16(s-1), pp.99-113.

Hunton, J., Wright, A. and Wright, S., 2001, May. Business and audit risks associated with ERP systems: knowledge differences between information systems audit specialists and financial auditors. In 4th European Conference on Accounting Information Systems (ECAIS), Athens.

Wright, C.S., 2008. The IT Regulatory and Standards Compliance Handbook: How to Survive Information Systems Audit and Assessments. Syngress.

Abu-Musa, A.A., 2004. Auditing e-business: new challenges for external auditors. Journal of American Academy of Business, 4(1), pp.28-41.

Cooper, D.R., Schindler, P.S. and Sun, J., 2006. Business research methods (Vol. 9). New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin.