See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/336734548

The influence of strategic decisions for provision of product (service) on the

customer's priorities: case study of automotive industry

Article  in  International Journal of Management Concepts and Philosophy · January 2019

DOI: 10.1504/IJMCP.2019.103195

CITATIONS READS

0 9

1 author:

Arash Apornak
Islamic Azad University
28 PUBLICATIONS   14 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Customer Satisfaction Measurement Based on Data Mining algorithms and uncertainty variables View project

The effect of service recovery on customers' satisfaction in e-banking: an empirical investigation View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Arash Apornak on 08 January 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Int. J. Management Concepts and Philosophy, Vol. X, No. Y, xxxx 1

Provide a framework to determine the key success

factors of knowledge management based on ABC
analysis: an empirical study in Iranian organisations

Arash Apornak*
School of Industrial Engineering,
Islamic Azad University,
South Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran
Email: arash.apornak@ut.ac.ir
*Corresponding author

Abbas Keramati
Department School of Industrial Engineering,
College of Engineering,
University of Tehran, Iran
Email: Keramati@ut.ac.ir

Abstract: The main aim of this research is to control and supervise

organisational resources to reach to an added value. In such a case, the
recognition of critical factors to implement KM successfully might be very
important. The current research addresses the major factors in implementing
KM based on a variety of literature sources and then compares it with similar
factors in an Iranian organisation. To reach to this objective, the ABC analysis
has been used in which the variety of factors have been categorised in three
groups, The findings of the paper indicate that all key factors derived from
literature review remains valid in case of Iranian organisation but the degree of
importance for major factors upgrade one level in case of the Iranian
organisation. The results also illustrated that the only factor which has lost its
importance in compared with the literature review is the ‘organisation
flexibility’.

Keywords: framework; knowledge management; KM; ABC analysis; key

success factors; organisation; Iran.

Reference tso this paper should be made as follows: Apornak, A. and

Keramati, A. (xxxx) ‘Provide a framework to determine the key success factors
of knowledge management based on ABC analysis: an empirical study in
Iranian organisations’, Int. J. Management Concepts and Philosophy, Vol. X,
No. Y, pp.xxx–xxx.

Biographical notes: Arash Apornak is a PhD student. He obtained his Masters

in Industrial Engineering from University of Tehran, and currently a PhD
candidate in Industrial Engineering in Scheduling and Production Management
at Islamic Azad University, South Tehran Branch. His research interests
include quality engineering, simulation, optimisation, flexible manufacturing
systems in service industries, healthcare systems and supply chain
management.

Copyright © 20XX Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

2 A. Apornak and A. Keramati

Abbas Keramati is an Associate Professor in School of Industrial Engineering,

College of Engineering, University of Tehran. His interests is in statically
management, E-CRM, management information systems and data mining.

1 Introduction

Given the rapidly growing field of competition atmosphere between organisations in the
field of business increasing competitiveness and enabling in order to survive and their
survival will be a determining role. Increasing competitiveness of organisations depend
on products and services with affordable, high quality, timely after-sales services to
customers of the main profit for shareholders and stakeholders. Rapid changes in the
world today, organisations are facing numerous challenges that knowing new
technologies and use better management create opportunities to their survival. The
application of knowledge management (KM) in the organisation seems necessary
(Deboski, 2006), institutions should be required to implement the desired KM.
Knowledge sharing among employees through the process of creating a culture of
‘institutionalising KM’.
Actually KM is to apply a regular and an object-oriented approach of visible and
invisible revenues of organisations. The main aim of this activity is to control and
supervise organisational resources to reach to an added value. In such a situation the
tendency of organisations to implement a successful KM are increasing. Consequently,
organisations have this tendency to implement KM successfully. In such a case, the
recognition of critical factors to implement KM successfully might be very important.
The importance of institutionalising KM in organisations is due primarily to correct
the misunderstanding of KM staff and secondly it helps to understand the benefits of
sharing knowledge within the organisation. The most important concern for effective
implementation and efficient KM, including aspects of man. This is why many
organisations are effective in implementing KM (Tat and Hase, 2007). If you are willing
to share their knowledge with other staff members No organisation, which would be very
difficult for the reward or the legal system, culture and knowledge sharing among
developed requires strong leadership in the process of institutionalisation of KM is to
introduce KM and motivate employees through cultural barriers in order to eliminate this
issue. Employees should first ensure this improves; the most important is the capital and
second most favourable way to the capital, knowledge sharing within the organisation
(Mohammadi, 2008). Creating a culture of knowledge sharing within organisations need
to encourage effective teamwork between employees and their optimal utilisation of
organisational knowledge to improve the services and products offer to customers
(Marquardt, 1996). Organisations have a tendency to be generally more dynamic and
dexterous than bigger associations, and more prepared to learn. Step by step an
instruction to successfully set up and manage great KM hones in small and medium
enterprises (SMEs) to guarantee their intensity is vital. KM alludes to dealing with the
enterprise's learning by method for a deliberate and hierarchical indicated handle for
obtaining, sorting out, managing, applying, sharing and restoring both implied and
unequivocal information by workers to improve association execution and make esteem
(Davenport et al., 2002).
 Provide a framework to determine the key success factors 3

Tiwana (2001) claims that “knowledge management can be reached out to

administration of authoritative information for making business esteem and producing an
upper hand”, “knowledge management empowers the creation, correspondence, and
utilisation of learning of assorted types to accomplish business objectives”, “knowledge
management is the capacity to make and hold more prominent incentive from centre
business abilities”. KMS underpins the utilisation of data through learning obtaining,
information sharing and information application for development. This caught learning is
then put away in information vaults to be shared amongst people and divisions. Hence,
the learning is connected in business circumstances, and presents different thoughts and
edges of reference to at last make new information. As new learning is made, it should be
caught and put away, shared and connected, and the cycle proceeds with KM practices
are connected to help the association reinforce its upper hand, and help information
labourers to use their aptitudes and their capacity to offer business esteem. In this
manner, KM is the procedure through which an association uses its aggregate insight to
finish its vital targets. KM process ought to begin by perceiving and recognising the
information to be caught, shared and connected, to empower the association and its
workforce to accomplish a reasonable and upper hand.
Truth be told, KM can give a few advantages to organisations, for example, better
correspondence, enhanced client benefit, quicker reaction times, upgraded creativity,
more prominent proficiency in procedures and techniques, and lessened danger of loss of
basic abilities (Edvardsson and Durst, 2013). Dotsika and Patrick (2013) underlined that
the execution of KM activities in organisations might be much more pivotal, as learning
can be their single key asset. Because of asset limitations, SMEs are especially required
to retain information from outside sources (Durst and Edvardsson, 2012). KM can give
snappy and simple access to outside wellsprings of learning and new and more serious
correspondence channels with accomplice associations. Moreover, it can eradicate
customary limitations on organisations advancement capacity, while utilising their
adaptability and responsiveness.
A flood of research has been directed to recognise achievement measures. DeLone
and McLean (2003) presented an extensive scientific classification with a specific end
goal to compose this assorted research. Most firms have begun to understand the
significance of KM in streamlining their operations and procedures to enhance
authoritative execution. So in this paper, we attempt to study and present a model for
measuring achievement of KM in organisations.
With no attempt at being subtle association, KM is continuously pushed for
upgrading interest and spryness in technique change and organisation movement. Pee and
Kankanhalli (2016) explored recognises components influencing KM, gauges their
affiliation impacts in light of the benefit based view, and assesses the impact of KM on
various leveled sufficiency. Physical resources contributed especially to propel KM (e.g.,
KM development) are guessed to work together with various leveled and human asset to
affect open affiliations’ KM limit in finding, sharing, applying, and making learning.
Most firms have begun to understand the significance of KM in streamlining their
operations and procedures to enhance authoritative execution. So in an exploration by
Wang and Yang (2016) attempted to study and present a model for measuring
achievement of KM in organisations.
The current research addresses the major factors in implementing KM based on a
variety of literature sources and then compares it with similar factors in an Iranian
4 A. Apornak and A. Keramati

organisation. To reach to this objective, the ABC analysis has been used in which the
variety of factors have been categorised in three groups: A factors as key factors with a
very high degree of importance, B factors as important factors and C factors as low
important factors, in order to reach this goal this paper is structured as follows: Section 2
presents a literature survey. In Section 3, the proposed method is provided generally.
Section 4 data analysis and results are stated. Finally, in Section 5 the conclusion,
limitation, Future research and managerial implementation delivered.

2 Literature review

The present era of knowledge and information is important as well as the production. The
ability to quickly and timely use of information and knowledge is not only for experts but
also for all human resources to advance the goals of the organisation (An et al., 2017).
Moffet et al. (2003) believe that the key success factors of KM include: organisational
culture, support and commitment of senior management, staffing, training, measurement,
KM, Benchmarking and build teamwork and IT Minister.
Chourides et al. (2003) express IT infrastructure and the strategy of knowledge are
the most important factors in the success of KM in an organisation.
Malti (2004) determined that the key success factors in the application of KM in
organisations, organisational culture, processes, KM, organisational strategy and
knowledge strategy, IT, Organisational processes and standards are measured.
Egbu (2004) suggest that key success factors of KM are culture organisational,
support and commitment of senior management, corporate strategy and knowledge
strategy, measurement, KM, IT, the security and transparency, creating a risky enterprise
environment, staffing and management, integration of KM through supply.
In a research by Wong (2005) have shown that critical success factors (CSFs) from
large companies’ perspectives have not considered the needs of smaller businesses. In
this study the author proposed a set of 11 CSFs which is believed to be more appropriate
for SMEs. An empirical assessment was conducted to evaluate the extent of success of
this proposition and the importance of the proposed CSFs was theoretically discussed.
The results from the empirical assessment illustrated the appropriateness of the proposed
CSFs.
Akhavan et al. (2006) in their paper emphasised that in the era of knowledge-oriented
organisations tend to take advantage of the KM more appropriate, therefore, how to
design and implement a successful KM system necessary in this regard. Organisations
can gain significant role in showing the importance and the need for organisations to have
a KM.
In a research by Lindner and Wald (2011) investigated success factors of KM in
temporary organisations. Based on a cross-industry sample with 414 organisations, they
applied the partial least square method to test the influence of cultural, organisational,
structural, and process-related factors on KM effectiveness, the results contributed to a
more differentiated understanding of KM in project environments.
In a research by Ragab and Arisha (2013) illustrated that knowledge is the currency
of the present economy, an imperative authoritative resource and a vital component to
making a maintainable upper hand. The resulting enthusiasm for KM has spurred an
exponential increment in distributions covering an expansive range of differing and
covering research zones. The reasons for this paper was to give a writing survey and
 Provide a framework to determine the key success factors 5

arranged examination of the quickly developing number of KM distributions, and offer

an exhaustive reference for new-comers setting out on research in the field with a specific
concentrate on the region of learning estimation. In a research by Lučkaničová and Oltra
(2014) answered these questions that how can organisational development program
efficacy be enhanced from a KM perspectives?, And what are the key cognisance sharing
challenges in the context of an organisational development program?, In this paper they
identified four KM domains (orchestrating, people, processes and IT implements) and
relate them to KS challenges (vigilance of cognisance needs, involution and trust,
evolution of organisational routines, and IT support).
In a research by Castillo and Cazarini (2014) proposed an integrated model for
implementation and development of erudition management (KM) utilising the enterprise
cognisance development (EKD) modelling methodology. The objective was achieved by
developing a literature research over KM and organisational modelling. Predicated on
this initial research, the first model version was engendered, according to the procedures
denoted by the EKD methodology. Subsequently, this first model version was submitted
for analyses, appraisal and validation, resulting in the final model version. This model is
composed of sub-models of goals and technical components providing a systemic vision
of cognisance management. The model avails organisations for implementing or
amending their KM activities.
The purport of the research by Intakhan (2014) was to examine the prosperity of
activity-predicated costing (ABC) implementation by adaptability factor analysis of ISO
9000 in a company in Thailand. The study attested the six constructs for the sample of
102 key participants. The results designated that ABC implementation prosperity in the
context of ISO 9000 certified companies in Thailand consists of upper-management
support, ABC system training, non-accounting ownership, links to quality initiative,
adequate resources, and links to performance evaluation.
The purpose of research by Basu and Ray (2014) is to validate through a case study
involving an organisation in India, a five-phase methodology proposed for designing and
implementing erudition management capability (KMC) in an organisation in India. This
paper adopts the case study approach, utilising semi-structured interviews and survey
questionnaires to quantify erudition management capability in the organisation for
determining the impact of the culled factors on KMC of the organisation factor analysis
and multiple regressions are opted for. The KMC is primarily driven through ameliorated
learning and opulent explicit cognisance.
The purpose of study by Mazaheri et al. (2015) is prioritised manufacturing
companies based on KM process. The sample research includes 56 managers of 15
manufacturing companies of Isfahan province in 2012. The indicators of KM process
have been investigated and Fuzzy method has been used for ranking companies by using
the closeness to the ideal solution method TOPSIS. Findings show the most and the least
effective factors in KM.
In a research by Karami et al. (2015), utilised a conceptual model, through
identification and prioritisation of factors, to guide research into the prosperous
implementation of erudition management system. They found 26 designators that were
categorised in five groups. Data were amassed in two phases:
a performing semi-structured interviews
b distribution and accumulation of questionnaires.
6 A. Apornak and A. Keramati

Next step was data analysis. Transcripts of the interviews were coded and analysed in the
qualitative phase and in the quantitative phase Friedman test is utilised for prioritisation
and confirmatory factor analysis is utilised to corroborate the factors. Determinately, the
model is proposed and suggestions are offered.
KM has emerged as one of the most discussed new management methods. Among the
most debated areas in KM has been the association between knowledge and firm
performance, but a lack of understanding and consensus still remains as a major issue. In
a research by Inkinen and Inkinen (2016) addressed the research gap by reviewing the
empirical literature and determining how KM-based managerial and organisational
practices are related with firm performance. The discoveries exhibited that use of KM
practices was critical driver for development. Likewise, particular authority attributes and
authoritative plans were probably going to bolster firm execution through more proficient
and powerful administration of information assets.
Masa’deh et al. (2017) investigated an empirical study of KM performance at a
University, they tried to investigate the relationship between KM process, KM
performance and job performance, in order to gathering data ,The data were collected
using a questionnaire with total collected back responses of 207 from university lecturers,
The main findings were related to confirming the two main hypotheses of the research by
using structural equation modelling technique that were related to testing if there were
relationships between the KM process and KM performance, as well as if the KM
performance was related to the job performance.
The KM based system is appeared to be valuable for building relationship,
interconnections and connections between expanded mix instruments to meet national,
societal and open needs in China. The system is critical for improving the part of learning
administration in coordinated effort to ensure the estimation of national chronicles assets
as the information resource of a state.
In this research we want to provide a framework to determine the key success factors
of KM based on ABC analysis in an empirical study in Iranian organisation so according
to the literature review we investigate the importance of KM and then by reviewing the
literature review and asking from our decision makers we classify the key success factor
in proportion with ABC analysis, and then analyse the results in order to determine the
key success factors of KM in the study organisation.

2.1 Classification success factors of KM based on ABC approach

ABC analysis is to classify the factors which are the subject of the analysis, the factors to
be divided into categories A, B and C that the factor group A has the greatest impact.
ABC Pareto analysis is similar to that in which a small number of factors (listed in
Category A) are typically a major share of the effects mentioned in the form. Factors are
classified in categories A, B and C:
Category A contains a lot of valuable factors in previous studies is designed so that the
frequency of the bunch is the cumulative distribution of the contribution of
the categories are more than 50% of the contribution of
Category B contains the elements of the set A is less valuable, yet in the literature
review, the share between 51% and 75% of them are visible
 Provide a framework to determine the key success factors 7

Category C contains factors that have been seen in the literature review that has the
least value compared with A and B.
With the implementation of the definitions set forth above, with the results shown in
Table 1 can be considered factors in the success of KM in terms of frequency in the next
section.
Table 1 ABC result

Classification success factors of knowledge management based on ABC approach

Category A
Organisational Culture(A)
IT and its infrastructure(A)
Corporate strategy and
strategy of their hand
illusion(A)
Management Human
Resources(A)
Support and commitment of
senior management(A)
Category B Category C
Training programs(B) Resources and control(C)
KM processes(B) Knowledge Sharing(C)
Organisational Motivational Goals(C)
infrastructure(B)
Measurement ( KM Standard definition(C)
measurement) (B)
Flexible organisation(B Security and Transparency(C)
Changes in organisational
structure(C)
Marketing supply chain
integration(C)
Professionals Network(C)
Management short courses(C)
BPR process(C)
Inspection of knowledge(C)
Environmental factors(C)
Benchmarking knowledge
management systems(C)
TQM(C)

In this study ABC analysis is used in order to determine key success factors of KM
priorities that is identified in the literature review then by using qualitative and
quantitative questionnaires priority key success factors of KM in our case study, finally
the results are compared with the results that extracted from the literature review, in
Table 1 we classify key success factors of KM in the literature review of the study.

3 Research methodology

In order to present a model for measuring KM success, a comprehensive model is

presented for determining the key success factors in a sample of Iranian organisations so
the steps of the research are expressed in Figure 1.
8 A. Apornak and A. Keramati

Figure 1 Research methodology

Start

Study of organisations Literature review and key

success factors of knowledge
management models

Extracting key success

factors and provides the
basic framework

Extracting and summarizing

the initial questionnaire
from the literature review

Interviews with experts

Second questionnaire
prepared

Secondary distribution of sample pilot

questionnaire

Collected and evaluate the validity and

reliability

Preparation of the final questionnaire

The population distribution of questionnaires in the

original sample

Data collection and analysis

Validation results through interviews with experts

The final framework

Finish
 Provide a framework to determine the key success factors 9

4 Data analysis and results

Data analysis from the questionnaire was divided into two parts, descriptive and
analytical statistics.

4.1 Descriptive analysis

We used purposive sampling in this study that is a non-probability sampling. The
numbers of samples were 45 people that answer the questionnaire.
The survey collected data for the study of different methods such as questionnaires,
interviews by asking from experts and decision makers.
For test the reliability of this method used Cronbach’s alpha, that the result was
0.887, that is greater than 0.7, then the result is reliable.
In Table 2 the frequency of each option in survey questionnaire were shown.
According to the questions in the questionnaire, it has shown the number of frequency
that each of the options has been voted. Questions 1 to 33 have been shown with the
symbol Q1 to Q33.
The result of Table 2 summarised in Table 3 that it states the Findings of the results.
For example, according to Table 3, it is obvious the maximum contribution to oppose
the ideas raised in the 33 questions shows 20% were related to the seventh question. This
question has been the idea that reduced duties to enhance the document with the
appropriate professionals. This shows lack of documentation experts.
Data’s in the last column of the table shows in questions 11 and 16, all respondents
have been agreed with the ideas contained in these questions. Having clear goals and
strategies and human resource management as well as two of the success of KM
objective, this question is contained in the messages.

4.2 Analytical findings

To assess the research hypotheses used T– Student test. The test is intended to limit the
number four for the separation of acceptance or rejections of assumptions have been
made.
The assumption H0 and H1 are as follows:
⎧H0 : μ ≤ 4
⎨
⎩ H1: μ < 4
Select number four the right side of the inequality of the H0 hypothesis because if that
option four in the questionnaire, the value of ‘agree’ and five as well as a choice ‘totally
agree’ is considered. Thus, all values above four receptions hypothesised synonymous
with each question.
 10

Table 2

1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Frequencies Frequencies
Fully disagree Disagree No idea I am agree I totally agree Fully disagree Disagree No idea I am agree I totally agree
Q1 0 1 4 27 13 Q16 0 0 0 19 26
Q2 0 0 4 20 21 Q17 0 5 7 23 10
Q3 1 4 10 20 10 Q18 0 0 3 18 24
Q4 0 0 3 22 20 Q19 0 0 3 26 16
Q5 0 1 6 23 15 Q20 0 0 3 25 17
A. Apornak and A. Keramati

Q6 0 0 1 20 24 Q21 0 1 7 25 12
Q7 2 7 9 18 9 Q22 0 0 4 24 16
Q8 0 1 3 21 20 Q23 0 1 6 28 10
Q9 0 2 5 29 9 Q24 0 0 3 21 21
Q10 0 0 2 21 22 Q25 0 0 9 18 18
Q11 0 0 0 15 30 Q26 0 0 2 28 15
Q12 0 0 2 24 19 Q27 0 0 10 19 16
The frequency of each option in survey questionnaire

Q13 0 0 12 18 15 Q28 0 2 4 17 22
Q14 0 0 2 18 25 Q29 0 0 1 24 20
Q15 1 0 7 15 22 Q30 0 0 7 20 18
Q31 0 0 5 28 12
Q32 0 0 5 27 13
Q33 0 1 5 23 16
 Provide a framework to determine the key success factors 11

Table 3 Findings of the results

Options
1 2 3 4 5 4 and 5
Index Fully I am I totally (Totally
Disagree No idea
disagree agree agree agree)
The maximum 4% 16% 27% 64% 67% 100
percent of
voters to this
option
(Corresponding (7) (7) (13) (9) (11) (11 and
question) 16)
The minimum 0% 0% 0% 33% 20% 60%
percent of
voters to this
option
(Corresponding (Except 3, %(Except for (11 and (11 and (7 and 9) (7)
question) 7 and 15) 1, 3, 5, 17, 21, 16) 15)
23, 28 and 33
9–7)
Average 0.3 1.8 10.4 48.7 38.9 87.6
percent of each
options (%) In
all questions

H0 will be assumed. As shown in Table 4, assuming H0 is accepted on all questions

except question7.
Table 4 also noted that questions 1 to 33 scale with the symbol Q1 to Q33 are shown.
Finally, with regard to the value of P (1 and 0.999) in the last column of Table 4 and
also the results of Tables 4 and 5 can be the most important factor in the success of KM
objective stated as follows:
• organisational culture (A)
• IT and its infrastructure (A)
• corporate strategy and strategy of their hand illusion (A)
• management human resources (A)
• support and commitment of senior management (A)
• professionals network (C)
• changes in organisational structure (C)
• motivational goals (C)
• knowledge sharing (C)
• security and transparency (C)
• measurement (KM measurement) (B)
• organisational infrastructure (B)
12 A. Apornak and A. Keramati

• having defined tasks

• less important factors
• management short courses
• flexible organisation.
Table 4 T-test results of the questionnaire’s 33 questions about the collection µ ≥ 4

Variables N Mean St. dev. SE mean 95% Upper bound T P-value

Q1 45 4.15556 0.67270 0.10028 4.32405 1.55 0.936
Q2 45 4.37778 0.64979 0.09686 4.54053 3.90 1.000
Q3 45 3.75556 0.98062 0.14618 4.00118 –1.67 0.051
Q4 45 4.37778 0.61381 0.09150 4.53152 4.12 1.000
Q5 45 4.15556 0.73718 0.10989 4.34020 1.42 0.918
Q6 45 4.51111 0.54864 0.08179 4.64853 6.25 1.000
Q7 45 4.55556 1.11916 0.16683 3.83588 –2.66 0.005
Q8 45 4.33333 0.70711 0.16683 4.51045 3.16 0.999
Q9 45 4.00000 0.70711 0.10514 4.17711 0.00 0.500
Q10 45 4.44444 0.58603 0.10541 4.59123 5.09 1.000
Q11 45 4.66667 0.47673 0.08736 4.78908 9.38 1.000
Q12 45 4.37778 0.57560 0.11634 4.52195 4.40 1.000
Q13 45 4.06667 0.78044 0.08775 4.26215 0.57 0.715
Q14 45 4.51111 0.58861 0.13257 4.65854 5.82 1.000
Q15 45 4.26667 0.88933 0.07446 4.48942 2.01 0.975
Q16 45 4.57778 0.49949 0.13467 4.70289 7.76 1.000
Q17 45 4.84444 0.90342 0.09320 4.07073 –1.16 0.127
Q18 45 4.46667 0.62523 0.08775 4.62327 5.01 1.000
Q19 45 4.28889 0.58861 0.08889 4.43632 3.29 0.999
Q20 45 4.31111 0.59628 0.10731 4.6046 3.50 0.999
Q21 45 4.06667 0.71985 0.09332 4.24697 0.62 0.731
Q22 45 4.28889 0.62603 0.10028 4.44569 3.10 0.998
Q23 45 4.04444 0.67270 0.09211 4.21294 0.44 0.670
Q24 45 4.40000 0.61791 0.11282 4.55477 4.34 1.000
Q25 45 4.20000 0.75679 0.08179 4.38956 1.77 0.958
Q26 45 4.28889 0.54864 0.11282 4.42631 3.53 1.000
Q27 45 4.13333 0.75679 0.12236 4.32289 1.18 0.878
Q28 45 4.31111 0.82082 0.10615 4.51670 2.54 0.993
Q29 45 4.42222 0.54309 0.08096 4.55825 5.22 1.000
Q30 45 4.24444 0.71209 0.10615 4.42280 2.30 0.987
Q31 45 4.15556 0.60135 0.08964 4.30618 1.74 0.955
Q32 45 4.17778 0.61381 0.09150 4.33152 1.94 0.971
Q33 45 4.20000 0.72614 0.10825 4.38188 1.85 0.964
 Provide a framework to determine the key success factors 13

All the above factors that illustrated derived from literature review and asking from
experts and decision maker in this research.
‘Having defined tasks’ factors that have been derived during an interview with one of
the experts on the results of one of the key factors (Category A) has been highlighted as
an important factor result in our case study in spite of lacking this factor in our literature
review.

5 Conclusions

The results of the above steps are summarised in Table 5. For easier to compare the
results with those obtained in the literature review, the items from one category to
another category shows with its specifics in one of each columns. The specific results of
the comparison of Table 1 will be deduced as follows:
• The share of Category A in our case study, it has increased significantly compared
with the literature review.
• The share of Category C in our case study, it has decreased substantially compared
with literature review.
Table 5 Classification of the key success factors of KM based on ABC

Classification based on the key success factors of knowledge management

Category A
Organisational culture (A)
IT and its infrastructure (A)
Corporate strategy and
strategy of their hand illusion
(A)
Management human
resources (A)
Support and commitment of
senior management (A)
Professionals network(C)
Changes in organisational
structure (C)
Motivational goals (C)
Knowledge sharing (C)
Security and transparency (C)
Measurement (KM
measurement) (B)
Organisational infrastructure
(B)
Having defined tasks
Category B Category C
Training programs (B) Management short courses
(C)
KM processes (B) Flexible organisation (B)
Environmental factors (C)
Standard definition (C)
Benchmarking knowledge
management systems (C)
BPR process (C)
Inspection of knowledge (C)
Resources and control (C)
TQM (C)
Marketing supply chain
integration (C)
14 A. Apornak and A. Keramati

The results of measurement equal success factors of KM in the organisation with the
results of the literature review can be summarised as follows:
1 All of the key factors in the sample inference based on literature review of key
Iranian presented.
2 Much of the invoices to the results of the literature review (other countries), a higher
(more important) is to find a shift. This can largely due to the antiquity of topics such
as BPR, TQM, networking specialists, and other communities in comparison with
the country.
3 Show less important factor ‘flexible organisation’ of the organisation can be
compared with results from the literature review that potential concerns that cause
this shift could be fear of staffs from losing their jobs, Obviously aware of this
situation, people are less willing to question the importance of this factor binding has
been made.
4 ‘Having defined tasks’ factors that have been derived during an interview with one
of the experts on the results of one of the key factors (Category A), which is due to
the lack of review of the literature, just as the proposed agent in Iranian organisation
that noted it in the results.

5.1 Limitation and future research

The legitimacy of the KM achievement display cannot really be set up on the premise of
a solitary review, thus alert ought to be practiced in summing up our discoveries. Certain
impediments must be considered while using the consequences of this review. The most
imperative impediment in this examination was test. The example in this review included
an instrument which was self-regulated. Furthermore, the exact outcomes are gotten from
an example of Iranian organisation and thus the discoveries may be nation particular.
Facilitate, the information for this review are based the respondents' discernments, which
may shift broadly crosswise over ventures, proprietorship and capacity and work
involvement of respondents inside the organisations.
In future research in order to generalise the results applying the KM achievement
show in various stages could give a more complete picture that would build our
comprehension of KM improvement. In addition, it ought to likewise be viewed as that
numerous critical exogenous factors may impact KM achievement. This contemplate
gives an establishment to further research that could add to the current information here.
Extra research is required to investigate the relevance of the achievement demonstrate in
more various settings.

5.2 Managerial implications

According to the results that obtained, in this section explain some important proposed
solutions for KM framework that can be implemented all the recommendations arising
from the review of the literature and presented by asking from experts as managerial
implication:
 Provide a framework to determine the key success factors 15

• Organisational culture
Organisational culture is a system of shared posits, values, and credence, which
governs how people comport in organisations. These shared values have a vigorous
influence on the people in the organisation and dictate how they dress, act, and
perform their jobs.
The content of this training is better in the field of IT, KM as well as the fields of
science and applications is shared among the units. However, over the last few years
in the shadow of encouraging people to upgrade job based, in-service training with
special emphasis placed on strengthening the content of the courses but the proposed
research topics with an emphasis on IT and management knowledge in such a way
that were During the same period benefit period can search the internet and its IT
infrastructure to access the resources they need to learn. Meanwhile, during the same
period is essential being tangible benefits of learning and applying KM to
participants expressed (Tat and Hase, 2007).
• Information technology and its infrastructure
The focus of the study and formation of databases in preparing of information
technology for KM by connecting multiple databases, these databases are between
the headquarters of the organisation and administration, transportation terminals
across the country formed a national WAN network it is defined. But creating IT
infrastructure across the country between departments of transportation
headquarters, the organisation’s current projects is the study of the formation of the
study. According to the tacit knowledge in the office, because they are old,
established and experienced personnel, IT infrastructure referred to create a unified
network knowledge sharing in the success of KM can be considered an effective
method (Ryan and Prybutok, 2001).
Among the requirements for success in this framework provide appropriate training
and personnel requirements can be used, independently of the IT staff, IT
infrastructure provided noted. The task of the office can be in charge of the office
planning and training implementation of KM.
• KM strategy and to align their organisational strategy
Due to the overall KM strategy should serve the organisation to highlight the role of
KM is important in achieving organisational goals, it is necessary to develop a
strategy for KM working group, at least one member of the management of large
organisations – met strategy organisations to be present. However, the strategy
should be based on KM strategy based on macro-organisational (Davenport et al.,
2002).
• Commitment and support of senior management
Senior management commitment is required for any initiative to be successful.
Simply stated, without their commitment or demonstrated leadership, initiatives stall,
fall substantially short of the expectation or just plain fail. With the introduction of
successful examples, KM in the world, trust to the top management in the
implementation of KM to be attracted (Wong, 2005; Ryan and Prybutok, 2001).
16 A. Apornak and A. Keramati

• Training/KM processes
Training courses to become familiar with the concepts and processes related to KM
is emphasised. In addition to the printing and distribution of educational bulletins on
personnel familiar with KM and communication between the top management,
middle management and staff of the body can also be considered. Obviously,
training courses although are important topics related to KM and special emphasis in
the course is the use of IT tools and procedures should also be considered. Including
virtual training tools and methods can be used for video conferencing, remote
sensing tools and so on (Wong, 2005; Tat and Hase, 2007).
• Environmental/organisational infrastructure
In order to reduce the impact of environmental factors on the success of KM, the
formation of an office/administrative workshop on ‘knowledge management’ will be
offered. In such a case the continuation of the operations of this office/workgroup
and stable financial resources for, can reduce the risks of environmental factors on
the stability of the KM has helped. Joining the office/working group members
participating in the first stage and communicated internally and later through the
budget office and the organisation can be obtained for the formation of a permanent
and official position of the organisation of management and planning pursued
(Herschel et al., 2000).
• Measuring KM/motivational goals/inspection knowledge
As to the issue of the granting of career paths for professionals with high implicit
knowledge can form an important role in documenting their knowledge and
motivation. In this context, the development of KM and the management of macro
indicators for the inclusion of these indicators in assessing the seasonal efficiency are
allocated to personnel requirements. In addition, the anticipated benefits of
reinforcements including travelling– the administrative allocation, particularly in
granting administrative privileges even in the allocation of housing can be seen
leaving the car and to encourage high-qualified staff to share their knowledge,
However, these incentives must be allocated in such a way that a good drive out the
willingness of people to show their knowledge by choosing a range of personnel at
various levels of the organisation, and continuous measure of the production or use
of their knowledge by others, cannot form the subject of inspection and measuring
success in achieving the objectives of KM (Mertins et al., 2003).
• Resource control
The budget allocated to provinces based on indicators such as efficacy and repeated
by the monitoring committee will be held at the headquarters of the annual
assessment. With the dynamic of their personnel in documenting activities and tacit
knowledge can be considered a rival to the optimal use of existing resources of the
province. Due to limitations in human resources development and formal structure
has been defined, additional staffing structure relevant KM synonymous with giving
additional responsibilities to existing staff organisation. At the same time, identify
the talented young (inexperienced) and put them on the side of the retirement of
experienced personnel, and documentation of tacit knowledge of the professionals
 Provide a framework to determine the key success factors 17

listed ways can be found in the better management of the human resources have an
effective role (Wong, 2005).
• Knowledge sharing/networking professionals
The result of this meeting can be implemented in existing development projects (or
study) on larger scales. Workshops or roundtables previous problems have been
documented analysis of the issue (through film, photographs, etc.), and provide
analysis and identify strategies to avoid similar problems in the future as other
methods proposed for Sharing knowledge. The formation of the forum as well as the
database of a network of experts to exchange views among experts from other
investment strategies for strengthening sharing knowledge. Taking advantage of the
new tools IT, such as email, CMS, FTP, etc., in this framework can play a role
(Davenport et al., 2002).
• Pilot
Implementation of KM in the form of a limited scale in order to verify the results of
the implementation of KM in the province first and then extended to the entire and
final results should be considered. The pilot will be fertile ground for the formation
of true support senior management in the development of the implementation of KM
established. The pilot results also can help attract provincial funds in other
provinces, with the positive results of sample/pilot province plans to replicate the
project in the area of impact/their province (Akhavan et al., 2006).
• The flexibility of the organisation
Factor of flexibility, according to the government’s key policy to shrink the size of
government over the past few years, special attention has to transfer the bulk of
services to the private sector actually needed to achieve this goal has been formed.
• Architecture student/change organisational structure
Using network services architecture specialists can study more comprehensive and
faster form of knowledge. Obviously, the development of knowledge architecture
should be based on the principle of reducing the administrative hierarchy and
strengthen the open-door policy to take place (Akhavan et al., 2006).

Acknowledgements

We are very grateful for the reviewers’ comments and the Prof. Angappa Gunasekaran
for their helpful comments which helped to improve the presentation of this research.
18 A. Apornak and A. Keramati

References
Akhavan, P., Jafari, M. and Fathian, M. (2006) ‘Critical success factors for knowledge management
systems: a multi case analysis’, European Business Review, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp.97–11 3.
An, X., Bai, W., Deng, H. and Dong, Y. (2017) ‘A knowledge management framework for
effective integration of national archives resources in China’, Journal of Documentation,
Vol. 73, No. 1, pp.18–34.
Basu, B. and Ray, P.K. (2014) ‘Measuring and evaluating KM capability in an organization: an
exploratory case study’, VINE: The Journal of Information and Knowledge Management
Systems, Vol. 44, No. 2, pp.267–294.
Castillo, L.A.M. and Cazarini, E.W. (2014) ‘Integrated model for implementation and development
of knowledge management’, Knowledge Management Research & Practice, Vol. 12, No. 2,
pp.145–160.
Chourides, P., Longbottom, D. and Murphy, W. (2003) ‘Excellence in knowledge management: an
empirical study to identify critical factors and performance measures’, Measuring Business
Excellence, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp.29–45.
Davenport, T.H., Thomas, R.J. and Cantrell, S. (2002) ‘The mysterious art and science of
knowledge worker performance’, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 44, No. 1, pp.23–30.
Deboski, S. (2006) Knowledge Management, John Wiley & Sons, Milton.
DeLone, W.H. and McLean, E.R. (2003) ‘The DeLone and McLean model of information system
success: a ten-year update’, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 19, No. 4,
pp.9–30.
Dotsika, F. and Patrick, K. (2013) ‘Collaborative KM for SMEs: a framework evaluation study’,
Information Technology & People, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp.368–382.
Durst, S. and Edvardsson, I.R. (2012) ‘Knowledge management in SMEs: a literature review’,
Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 16, No. 6, pp.879–903.
Edvardsson, I.R. (2006) ‘Knowledge management in SMEs: the case of Icelandic firms’,
Knowledge Management Research & Practice, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp.275–282.
Edvardsson, I.R. and Durst, S. (2013) ‘The benefits of knowledge management in small and
medium-sized enterprises’, Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, Vol. 81, pp.351–354.
Egbu, C. (2004) ‘Managing knowledge and intellectual capital for improved organizational
innovations in the construction industry: an examination of critical success factors’,
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 11, No. 5, pp.301–315.
Herschel, R.T. et al. (2000) ‘Chief knowledge officer: critical success factors for knowledge
management’, Information Strategy, Vol. 16, No. 4, p.37.
Inkinen, H. and Inkinen, H. (2016) ‘Review of empirical research on knowledge management
practices and firm performance’, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 20, No. 2,
pp.230–257.
Karami, M., Alvani, S.M., Zare, H. and Kheirandish, M. (2015) ‘Determination of critical success
factors for knowledge management implementation, using qualitative and quantitative tools
(case study: Bahman automobile industry)’, Iranian Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 8,
No. 2, pp.181–201.
Lindner, F. and Wald, A. (2011) ‘Success factors of knowledge management in temporary
organizations’, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 29, No. 7, pp.877–888.
Lučkaničová, M. and Oltra, V. (2014) ‘Unlocking the catalysts for organizational development
program success: a case study of knowledge management challenges in an international
context’, Zarządzanie Zasobami Ludzkimi, Vol. 1, No. 6, pp.51–66.
Mathi, K. (2004) Key Success Factors for Knowledge Management, International Business
Management& Consulting, MBA, Master thesis.
 Provide a framework to determine the key success factors 19

Masa’deh, R., Masa’deh, R., Shannak, R., Shannak, R., Maqableh, M., Maqableh, M., Tarhini, A.
and Tarhini, A. (2017) ‘The impact of knowledge management on job performance in higher
education: the case of the University of Jordan’, Journal of Enterprise Information
Management, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp.244–262.
Mazaheri, M., Shahin, A. and Shirouyehzad, H. (2015) ‘Proposing an approach for ranking
manufacturing companies based on knowledge management process using fuzzy TOPSIS with
a case study on the excellent brands of Isfahan province’, International Journal of Process
Management and Benchmarking, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp.133–155.
Mertins, K., Heisig, P. and Vorbeck, J. (Eds.) (2003) Knowledge Management: Concepts and Best
Practices, Springer Science & Business Media.
Marquardt, M.J. (1996) Building the Learning Organization: A System Approach to Quantum
Improvement, McGraw-Hill: New York.
Moffett, S., McAdam, R. and Parkinson, S. (2003) ‘An empirical analysis of knowledge
management applications’, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp.6–26.
Mohammadi, K. (2008) Measurement of the Readiness of An Organization to Manage Knowledge
by Designing A Conceptual Model, MS Thesis, Tehran University.
Pee, L.G. and Kankanhalli, A. (2016) ‘Interactions among factors influencing knowledge
management in public-sector organizations: a resource-based view’, Government Information
Quarterly, Vol. 33, No. 1, pp.188–199.
Intakhan, P. (2014) ‘ABC success: evidence from ISO 9000 certified companies in Thailand’,
Asian Review of Accounting, Vol. 22, No. 3, pp.287–303.
Ragab, M.A.F. and Arisha, A. (2013) ‘Knowledge management and measurement: a critical
review’, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 17, No. 6, pp.873–901.
Ryan, S.D. and Prybutok, V.R. (2001) ‘Factors affecting knowledge management technologies: a
discriminative approach’, Journal of Computer Information Systems, Vol. 41, No. 3, pp.31–7.
Tat, L.W. and Hase, S. (2007) ‘Knowledge management in the Malaysian aerospace industry’,
Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp.143–151.
Tiwana, A. (2001) The Knowledge Management Toolkit: Practical Techniques for Building
Knowledge Management System, Prentice Hall Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Wang, M.H. and Yang, T.Y. (2016) ‘Investigating the success of knowledge management: an
empirical study of small-and medium-sized enterprises’, Asia Pacific Management Review,
Vol. 21, No. 2, pp.79–91.
Wong, K.Y. (2005) ‘Critical success factors for implementing knowledge management in small and
medium enterprises’, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 105, No. 3, pp.261–279.

View publication stats