Soft Systems Methodology

A Conceptual Model of Knowledge Management Systems Initiatives in Malaysian

Public Universities

Nor Hasliza Md Saad

, Hasmiah Kasimin

, Rose Alinda Alias

and Azizah Abdul Rahman

School of Management, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11800, Penang, Malaysia

Faculty of Economics and Management, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Selangor, Johor, Malaysia

Faculty of Computer Science and Information System, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Selangor, Johor, Malaysia

Keywords: Knowledge Management Systems, Soft Systems Methodology, Multiple Case Studies.

Abstract: The implementation of knowledge management systems (KMS) initiatives is recognized by its highly

complex situations and difficult to manage, involving a range of interrelated and overlapping components of

technology, organization and people. The objective of the study is to demonstrate how the Soft Systems

Methodology (SSM) approach can be applied to investigate the implementation of KMS initiatives in their

natural setting. The study is carried out through four case studies within Malaysian Public Universities

(MPUs) representing different characteristics of universities based on the year of their establishment. The

findings reveal the process of KMS initiatives contains six different kinds of activity through the

development of conceptual model. Furthermore, the analysis was conducted to identify factors influencing

the activities within the proposed conceptual model. In this sense, the application of SSM recommends the

advantage of a comprehensive analysis by integrating both the process and the factors influencing the

implementation of KMS initiatives in the higher education context, especially in the MPUs.

1 INTRODUCTION

The higher education (HE) sector involves

knowledge-based organisations where the role and

function of institutions is based on the ‘knowledge’

agenda (Oakley, 2003), (Cronin and Davenport,

2000). KMS initiatives should be implemented in

the HE sector to change its classical paradigm to

confront changes in the external environment change

and provide effective services to meet market

demand and enhance the organization (Serban and

Luan, 2002). A variety of different approach of

KMS initiatives can be introduced not only in the

areas of teaching and learning, but also in the area of

administration to support a wide range of business

processes. In the last decade, an increasing number

of HE sectors around the world have begun to

introduce KMS initiatives. However, there is little

knowledge on how MPUs implement KMS

initiatives and what challenges they confront.

Several studies that examine KMS initiatives in the

higher education sector in Malaysia have indicated

that public universities were slow to implement

KMS initiatives and most were at the initial stage of

implementation (Mohayidin et al., 2007); (Suhaimee

et al., 2005). The objective of the study is to

demonstrate how the SSM approach can be applied

to investigate the implementation of KMS

initiatives, especially the development of conceptual

model. Furthermore, the analysis identifies which

factors in the surrounding environment are

facilitating to the implementation of KMS initiatives

and which may impede the effectiveness of KMS

initiatives.

2 SOFT SYSTEMS

METHODOLOGY

The SSM emerged in response to the limitations of

the hard systems approach to adequately address

complex real world problems that involve human

issues. The emergence of a hard systems approach

was influenced by systems engineering and system

analysis, which use a systematic approach to

problem-solving in relation to the design,

development and operation of a machine to achieve

Md Saad N., Kasimin H., Alias R. and Abdul Rahman A..

Soft Systems Methodology - A Conceptual Model of Knowledge Management Systems Initiatives in Malaysian Public Universities.

DOI: 10.5220/0004139000600069

In Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing (KMIS-2012), pages 60-69

ISBN: 978-989-8565-31-0

 2012 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.)

predefined objectives (Ingram, 2000). Thus, to solve

a problem they use reductionists concepts that divide

the problem into smaller pieces and manageable

fragments, without emphasising human or

organisational issues (Bennetts et al., 2000). This

approach is highly appropriate in clearly structured

and well-defined problems. In the early 1970s, the

soft systems methodology was incorporated into a

practical methodology by Professor Peter Checkland

in collaboration with his colleagues at Lancaster

University (Checkland, 1981). The approach used to

apply SSM to research can vary, but the basic

feature corresponding to the conceptual basis

remains constants. In general, this means that SSM

typically has three primary concerns in process of

improving problem situations. First, SSM is

concerned with examining complex problems

involving the socio-technical system, which involves

human intervention. A strong emphasis is placed on

understanding the different perceptions of multiple

stakeholders involved in the problem situations.

Second, SSM highlights the importance of creating a

purposeful human activity model relevant to the

problem situations as a device to identify appropriate

changes that could be made to improve the problem

situation. Finally, SSM strives to create a learning

system to identify methods for improvement by

providing with one or more alternative solutions

rather than an optimisation approach (Petkov et al.,

2007). In this research we will focus on the

particular strength of SSM in developing conceptual

model that identify the necessary pattern activities in

the process of KMS initiatives.

3 METHODOLOGY

This research adopts a multiple case study approach

to investigate four MPUs representing two major

characteristics of the higher education environment

in Malaysia: the older universities established before

1990, where generally larger in size; the newer

universities established after 1990, where commonly

representing smaller in size. An interpretive

approach is used as a mode of inquiry to allow the

researcher to establish meaning from the complex

problem of the real-world situation. Data collection

came mainly from interviews and document

analysis, and each of these methods offers important

insights and understanding into the cases. First, the

interviews were held with the KMS champions who

were highly involved in major activities in the

implementation of KMS initiatives at the university

level. They included IT Directors, IT Managers,

Chief Librarians and other related administrative

director. Second, relevant documents were collected

from government publications, annual reports,

institutional websites, business manuals and slide

presentations. Data were collected on the issues

related to (i) the champion of KMS initiatives; (ii)

the process involved; and (iii) the influencing factors

of the implementation of KMS initiatives.

4 FINDINGS

This section compares the findings of the four cases,

highlighting the similarities and differences to find

the common patterns of activities in a conceptual

model for implementing KMS initiatives. The

analysis revealed that this conceptual model has six

related activities, as depicted in Figure 1.

The four cases were divided into two groups for

the purposes of comparison and contrast. One group

consists of University A(UA) and University B(UB),

which are categorised as older universities. The

other group consists of University C(UC) and

University D(UD), which represent newer

universities. In general, MPUs are slowly

undergoing changes to embrace the challenge of the

implementation of the KMS initiative. The cases

differ in their priority and scope of bringing the

KMS initiative to the university context. However,

they have common activities that indicate they are

operating in the similar context of MPUs.

4.1 Activity 1: Gain Awareness and

Appreciation of KMS Initiatives by

Top Management

This activity deals with the awareness of and

appreciation for KMS initiatives by top

management. In each case, the appreciation of KMS

initiatives by top management was found to be

crucial for creating more formal and conscious

attempts to implement KMS initiatives at the

university level. They were important instruments

for bringing KMS initiatives to the forefront of the

university agenda (Soliman and Spooner, 2000);

(Singh and Kant, 2008). The universities’ decision to

implement KMS initiative is generally triggered by a

specific event or circumstance, which they are taken

place. In general, the summary of activity 1 is listed

in Table 1.

According to the findings of the analysis, the

primary factor influences for this activity is

environmental Pressure. The external environmental

context within the social contexts of the MPU

SoftSystemsMethodology-AConceptualModelofKnowledgeManagementSystemsInitiativesinMalaysianPublic

Universities

Figure 1: The Conceptual Model of KMS initiatives in MPUs.

represents the influence of various factors that

contributed to the implementation of KMS

initiatives. In all cases, the government agenda stood

out as one of the most important external factors for

bringing KMS initiatives into universities. Many

respondents recognised the contribution of this

factor in influencing top-level decision makers.

Another external factor that emerged from the data

analysis concerns advances in technology. All of the

case universities struggle to keep pace with rapid

rate of technological changes. In several cases,

external recognition seems to be an effect of

continuously maintaining the effective utilisation of

technology for facilitating KMS initiatives. Awards

and public recognition have been possible incentives

for influencing the implementation of KMS

initiatives. An example of external recognition is the

government rewards for excellent utilisation of

technology in improving business performance. The

university’s interest in the KMS initiatives also

arises because of its desire to follow other MPUs

that are already embarking on KMS initiatives.

Table 1: The summary of activity 1.

Influencing

Factor

Key Issues Highlighted Case

External

pressure

Government agenda,

competitive and global

education environment, and

rapid technological change

UA, UB,

UC, UD

External recognition UB,UC

Peer community pressure UC, UD

4.2 Activity 2: Identify and Assign

KMS Champions to Spearhead the

KMS Initiatives

In activity 2, it is important to consider that the

university’s top management contributed strongly to

the selection and assignment of KMS champions.

The university’s top management plays a critical

role in identifying specific KMS champions with

multidisciplinary expertise and representatives from

the core business departments that would enhance

the implementation. A summary of activity 2 is

listed in Table 2.

According to the findings of the

analysis, the primary influences for this activity can

be classified as follows:

a) Identification of KMS Champion. With regards

to the characteristics of the KMS champions, an

interesting element has emerged. In all of the cases,

the two main domains of expertise have emerged in

making the KMS initiatives successful: the technical

professionals from the IT department and

information management professionals from the

library domain.

The KMS champions contribute their expertise to

support KMS initiatives. The IT department is more

strongly driven by their efforts in preparing for the

advanced technical requirements of KMS initiatives.

The library is concerned with upgrading traditional

library services and information resources into a

more digital environment. The selection of KMS

champions should be based on expertise that can

KMIS2012-InternationalConferenceonKnowledgeManagementandInformationSharing

Table 2: The summary of activity 2.

Influencing Factors Key Issues Highlighted Case

a) Identification of KMS Champion

iversity of expertise domains (IT department and

ibrary).

UA,UB,U

C,UD

b) Formalisation of the Organisational

Structure

Clear specialized department (KM center) and create new

ole(CIO/CKO).

UA, UC

ack of clear specialized department and create new role. UB,UD

c) RelationshipbetweenKMS

Champions

Close collaboration between KMS champions UC,UD

ack of collaboration between KMS champions UA,UB

effectively assist in ensuring better implementation.

Many studies on KMS initiatives within the HE

context have reported that either the library or the IT

department indeed play a major role in the projects

and activities of KMS (Cain et al., 2008); (Chan et

al., 2005); (Chang, 2003), (Cronin and Davenport,

2000).

b) Formalisation of the Organisational Structure.

The concern for this activity is to specify a clear role

and responsibility of the KMS champion for KMS

initiatives. The top management is in a position of

authority to delegate responsibility and the setting of

the organisational structure. The presence of an

organisational structure setting by creating specific

positions and structure would help to make KMS

initiatives highly visible organization (McDermott

and O’Dell, 2001), as demonstrated in the case of

UA and UC. Daft (2007) argued that a lesser degree

of formalisation of the organisational structure, such

as creating a task force function and responsibility,

seems to solve the short-term problem and lack of

sustainability. However, the issue of a lack of a clear

organisational structure emerged in the other two

cases. These cases were concerned with establishing

a taskforce to address KMS initiatives rather than

adjusting their existing organisational structure.

c) Relationship between KMS Champions. The

coordination of the relationship of KMS champions

was another common issue that drew attention in the

analysis of the four cases. From the findings,

collaboration between KMS champions is critical to

achieve a comprehensive and unified direction to

support university-wide KMS initiatives. This need

is often due to the normal practice of these KMS

champions, which have different business practices

and services. The close relationships among these

key players were achieved by the skilful

coordination and monitoring of the university’s top

management. The close relationship of KMS

champions in the case of UC was able to contribute

to the standardisation of the KMS project and

initiatives;hence, they utilised the scarce resources

available in the most efficient manner to support the

project. This accomplishment is achieved through

coordination by top management (Cain et al., 2008),

and without this formality, the management of

collaboration is unlikely.

4.3 Activity 3: Establish a Strategy for

the KMS Initiatives

This activity is considered to be very crucial that

would serve as a platform to effectively guide the

overall implementation of KMS initiatives. A

strategy needs to be established to decide what

important elements should be included in the KMS

initiatives, as presented in Table 3.

According to the findings of the analysis, the

primary influences for this activity can be classified

as follows:

a) Knowledge Resource. The central issue for

initiating KMS is to identify the types of potential

knowledge resources that can offer strategic value

and outcomes to the organisation. The essence of

this activity is to make knowledge resources more

accessible and available online. In all of the cases,

priority was according to leveraging explicit

knowledge resources that exist in terms of business

documents and reports or reside in various

resources, including in the core databases.

In addition, this knowledge resource is somehow

lacking in a standardisation procedure to manage. To

make this matter more problematic, knowledge is

scattered across the university and exists in a variety

of formats. However, most cases demonstrated less

effort to leverage tacit knowledge sources from

human experience and business activities. This tacit

knowledge is usually considered to be more difficult

to leverage than explicit knowledge, and there is

poor understanding of the proper way to manage

tacit knowledge.

b) Policies and Procedures. In most cases, the KMS

champions are concerned with the lack of policies

and procedures for clearly regulating and controlling

the related activities. Furthermore, it is clearly stated

that very little effort has been made by top

management to put appropriate policies and

SoftSystemsMethodology-AConceptualModelofKnowledgeManagementSystemsInitiativesinMalaysianPublic

Universities

Table 3: The summary of activity 3.

Influencing Factors Key Issues Highlighted Case

a) Strategic direction

Lack of clear strategy direction UA,UB,UD

Clear strategy direction and comprehensive UC

b) Management of

Knowledge resource

Systematic procedure to manage knowledge resource UC

Lack of systematic procedure to manage knowledge resource UA,UB,UD

Less emphasis on leveraging tacit knowledge UA,UB,UC,UD

c) Policies and procedures

Lack of clear policies and procedures UA,UB,UD

Clear policies and procedures UC

d) Outsourcing

consideration

Speed up project development UA, UC

Gain knowledge and skills UA,UC

Avoid bias decision UA

e) Financial support

Insufficient financial support UA, UB

Sufficient financial support UC

Constraints in financial planning UA,UB

f) Incentives and rewards Lack of incentive and reward UA,UB, UD

procedures in place to support KMS initiatives. It is

particularly challenging for KMS champions to

induce participating departments to participate in

their KMS initiatives because the introduction of

KMS initiatives somehow changes the current

practice of business processes to encourage the

adoption of IT applications and enhance knowledge-

sharing activities. However, only the case of UC

provided policies and procedures to guide all

departments within the university to ensure the

adoption of KMS initiatives. Notwithstanding, a

number of studies have discussed the importance of

creating well-documented policies and procedures to

address core activities in the process of KMS

initiatives (Ronald D. F and K., 2007); (Sharifuddin

and Rowland, 2004); (Patricia Ordóñez de Pablos,

2004).

c) Outsourcing Consideration. The role of KMS

champions is ultimately to be responsible for

managing KMS initiatives according to the plan.

Some of the cases naturally underestimated the

complexity of preparing and managing KMS

initiatives to be completed according to the project

schedule and desired outputs. Unfortunately, these

cases did not consider effective decisions in gaining

the benefits of outsourcing (e.g., expertise, cost, and

time). Among the four institutions, two cases

stressed the importance of employing outsourced

support. They believed that this approach might

influence the process of KMS initiatives in a

positive way. These two cases highlighted their

conscious decisions to hire external consultants

during the initial stage of introducing KMS

initiatives. This effort was particularly considered to

be a method for gaining the advantage of the

specialised skills of the consultants and to accelerate

project development.

d) Financial Support. The issue of financial support

appeared to have an important influence on the

selection and development of new technological and

innovative solutions at the institutional level. The

first primary concern brought up in all of the cases

was the time constraint related to financial IT

planning. The three cases agreed that to continue

updating the system to keep abreast of rapid rate of

technological change, they needed to upgrade the

comprehensive archival systems and introduce new

systems to keep them in compliance with their

current technological functions. The problem of

allocation financial support for KMS initiatives is

many facetted, especially is in the long term and

involved various interrelated projects. The allocation

of financial support tended to be concerned with

priorities need to be addressed. According to Wong

(2005), decision maker(s) should develop a realistic

scope of the project, according to available financial

support.

Incentive and Reward. Reward and incentive are

another important consideration for effective KMS

initiatives. The focus of this activity is to encourage

participation in KMS initiatives. One case identifies

the importance of preparation incentives and

rewards to KMS champions and staff participants

which found that the incentives help individuals to

increase their willingness to participate and feel

appreciated for their contribution. Many studies have

posited that the essence of incentives and rewards is

to support changes to employee attitudes and

behaviours such that they will contribute and

participate in KMS initiatives (Sing and Kant, 2008).

KMIS2012-InternationalConferenceonKnowledgeManagementandInformationSharing

Table 4: The summary of activity 4.

Influencing Factors Key Issues Highlighted Case

a) IT infrastructure and

platform

Lack of coordination and standardization UA,UB,UD

Effective Coordination and standardisation UC

Complexity of maintaining the mixture of legacy and new

technology

UA,UB

Robust IT infrastructure UC

b) Knowledge repository

Lack of coordination and standardization UA,UB,UD

Complexity of managing large amounts of databases UA,UB,

Large collection of resources involved in digitalising UA,UB,

Lack of information security control UA,UB,UD

Complexity of digital document categorisation UA,UB,UC,UD

Less complexity of managing a small amount of resources. UC

c) System application

development

Isolated development and focus on departmental needs UA,UB,UD

Integrated and interoperable UC

d) Network performance and

reliability

Extensive network security threats and poor performance. UA,UB

Lack of network interruption UD,UC

4.4 Activity 4: Identify the Necessary

IT Support for the KMS Initiatives

This activity concerns efforts to decide on and

prepare the necessary IT solutions to support the

desired KMS initiatives’ objectives, as listed in

Table 4. This activity is essential for effective

implementation of KMS initiatives. In this activity,

the IT professional provides a crucial role in

identifying and guiding on the requirements for IT

capabilities and functionality that can support and

enhance the process for capturing, storing and

disseminating knowledge (Tseng, 2008).

There are five major component issues that

should be addressed for effective KMS initiatives.

a) IT Infrastructure Platform. In each case, IT

infrastructure influenced the preparation of

technology requirements for KMS initiatives. There

are two major barriers experienced by several cases

for moving towards the mission of preparing IT

platforms for facilitating KMS initiatives. The first

barrier is the lack of a standard and common IT

infrastructure; current platforms are heterogeneous

and controlled by different departments. Within this

situation, the equipment and infrastructure are often

poorly managed, which leads to inefficient use of

resources. Another concern regarding IT

infrastructure is the maintenance of insufficient

technical requirements that are outdated or lack

capable technologies. This issue reflects concerns

about the challenge of preparing an appropriate IT

infrastructure in which some components of the

installation-based infrastructure are subject to

upgrades or replacement. The other potential

problem raised was incompatibility and complexity

with the installation-based infrastructure. The well

preparation of IT infrastructure was especially

apparent in the case of UC, especially with well-

planned state-of-the-art technology in providing a

coordinated and standardised approach. This factor

seems to facilitate better technology management

without much concern for the various conflicts of

multiple standards of equipment and outdated

technology. The development of a well-planned

architecture of an IT infrastructure for the entire

university environment is an important consideration

to facilitate coordination, management, and

connectivity among different departments(Zakareya

Ebrahim, 2005).

b) Knowledge Repository. In all cases, database

resources, with their various challenges and

opportunities, were brought into play because they

are considered to be at the heart of the knowledge

resources that can be better utilised. There are six

major barriers that were experienced by these cases

in moving towards the mission of preparing

technology platforms for facilitating KMS

initiatives. First, a lack of coordination and

standardisation of database resources has a negative

influence on the complex process of data integration,

data availability and data accessibility. The cause of

the problem was identified as being either the

incompatibility of heterogeneous platforms or that

the database resources were placed at dispersed

locations that often lacked common data definitions

and poor data documentation. On the contrary, UC

had an encouraging experience with enterprise

database solutions and centralised data management

for the entire knowledge repository.Within this

scope, this university acknowledged that this

database approach was designed to enforce

consistency and facilitate database management

SoftSystemsMethodology-AConceptualModelofKnowledgeManagementSystemsInitiativesinMalaysianPublic

Universities



across different resources.

Second, the huge amount of database resources

has also increased the complexity of managing a

knowledge repository for the cases of UA and UB.

These universities have undertaken the task of

collecting their archive resources together with

current data resources into a more manageable

effort. Third, they also have large collections of

databases resources and paper-based documents

requiring effective electronic management to make

them more accessible and available. Fourth,

throughout the four cases, the lack of systematic

categorisation of digital documents is widely

recognised as one of the earliest and most crucial

efforts in managing digital documents. Finally, the

issue of information security was the most pressing

concern in all of the cases. There is a crucial need

for better information security in terms of user

access control and document confidentiality.

c) System Application Development. According to

the cross-case analysis, there is a significant

difference between UC and the other three

universities. In many cases, the continuing effort to

develop multiple applications for different purposes

in an uncoordinated manner worsens the lack of

information shared and increases duplication efforts.

UC attempted to take advantage of offering

integrated and interoperable applications for

business usage. The benefit of this approach is that it

would tremendously streamline business processes,

enhance information flow across departments, and

reduce the usage of paper. Cain et al.(2008)

suggested that universities should focus on

applications for supporting the streamlining of

business processes by understanding and developing

integration to meet the range of business function

needs. Furthermore, many cases focus on user-

friendly applications but ignore the importance of

customisation and personalisation of the user

interface.

d) Network Performance and Reliability. The issue

of network performance concerns the network speed

and connectivity of system applications. The major

current network issues emphasise the concern

regarding threats from hackers, intruders or viruses.

This focus is due to a lack of coordination in

controlling fragmented server locations across the

university and frequent service interruptions.

Network performance is another concern that

supports the effectiveness of KMS initiatives,

particularly in the cases of UA and UB. Specifically,

network connection problems, such as network

failure or a slow connection, tend to erode the

efficiency of information flow and decrease user

satisfaction. Centralised policy management and

network interface provisioning are powerful

strategies to regulate the network and control traffic

load for performance, efficiency and security (Joshi

et al., 2001).

4.5 Activity 5: Prepare Support

Programs for the KMS Initiatives

The preparation of appropriate support programs is

another important stage to address in the process of

implementing KMS initiatives. Each case study has

its own way to make not only KMS champions but

also participating departments aware of the current

KMS initiatives being conducted and to attempt to

clearly spread KMS initiatives. The summary of the

activity 5 is listed in Table 5.

a) Motivation and Commitment of KMS

Champions. In the three cases, motivation emerged

as an influencing factor that encouraged the key

players to effectively implement the KMS

initiatives. The motivating factors might be in terms

of the sponsorship of required resources and

leadership from top management in pursuing the

wider scope of KMS initiatives across the university.

For these KMS champions, the top management was

fundamental in its position of authority to set the

direction of KMS initiatives and to delegate

resources to drive the KMS initiatives forward.

Motivation and commitment of the KMS champions

influences the effectiveness of KMS initiatives

(Holsapple and Joshi, 2000).

This study found that the KMS champions perform

an important role in distributing KMS messages and

activities consistently across the university. In

addition, the three cases also demonstrated that the

KMS champions were motivated to spearhead KMS

because they perceived that KMS initiatives would

provide a new opportunity to enhance business

processes and decision making. In the majority of

the cases, it was clear that there was a problem with

the process of firmly understanding the concept of

KMS initiatives. Many studies have identified that

understanding the concept of KMS plays a major

role in preparing and identifying effective

approaches to supporting KMS initiatives (Pieris et

al., 2003); (Ajmal et al., 2010). Furthermore, the

KMS champions need to be equipped with IT

knowledge and skills that will help them make

decisions or develop effective IT support. Several

studies have revealedthat public sector is confronted

by a severe technology skills deficit, mostly in the

form of a lack of proper training.(Moon, 2002);

(Norris et al., 2001).

KMIS2012-InternationalConferenceonKnowledgeManagementandInformationSharing

Table 5: The summary of activity 5.

Influencing Factors Key Issues Highlighted Case

a) Motivation and

commitment of

KMS champions

Lack of clear understanding of the KMS concept UA,UB,UD

Lack of IT skills and knowledge UA,UB,UC,UD

Perceived benefit AU,UB,UC

Lack of top management support UD

b) Motivation and

commitment of

participatory

departments

Lack of perceived benefit of the project UA,UB,UD

Prefer an individual department approach UA,UB,UD

Lack of trust and confidence UA,UB,UD

Perceived benefit of the project UC

Communication between KMS champions and business departments UC

Trust and confidence to share their information UC

Table 6: The summary of management activity.

Influencing Factors Key Issues Highlighted Case

Coordination approach

Lack of standard coordination approach UA,UB,UD

Standard coordination approach UC

Measure progression Lack of performance measurement UA,UB,UC, UD

b) Motivation and Commitment of Participating

Departments. The key objective of this activity is to

create awareness about KMS initiatives over the

entire university and attract other departments’

participation. The finding indicates that the

involvement and participation of the business

departments is crucial to give appreciation to their

ideas and comments, including creating a sense of

ownership and perceived benefit of the project. In

many cases, they were concerned about the lack of a

knowledge-sharing culture due to a lack of

communication and connectivity among the various

business departments because of differences in their

operations and services. Furthermore, the KMS

champion faces another problem concerning a lack

of trust and confidence in the information security

flow in the digital environment. This issue was

partly due to the absence of a formal approach and

procedural guidelines to deal specifically with this

problem. Thus, it became difficult for KMS

champions to stimulate and motivate the various

departments to have a favourable attitude towards

knowledge sharing. This finding is consistent with

the literature on IT project development, which

found that the key players of a project should not

underestimate the stakeholder’s capacity to influence

either the escalation or failure of the project

(Markus, 1983); (Walsham, 1993).

4.6 Management Activity: Monitoring

and Controlling the

Implementation of the KMS

Initiatives

The management activity is also considered a very

important activity in SSM, as it has become essential

to monitor and control with the issues that prevent

effective KMS initiatives. A summary of

management activity is shown in Table 6.

This activity is very important, as once the

process of implementing KMS initiatives is

underway, it becomes essential to constantly monitor

and control the progress and performance of KMS

initiatives. It is interesting to note that the finding

indicates that most cases do not have institutional

monitoring and controlling mechanisms of the

implementation of KMS initiatives at the university

level. The central coordination of monitoring and

controlling KMS would provide a more unified and

collaborative approach. There is a need to develop a

monitoring and controlling system that would

constantly assess the implementation processes

(Baudoin, 2003).

5 DISCUSSION AND

CONCLUSIONS

The SSM is presented as a tool for analyzing and

understanding unstructured problems that deal with

the complexity of social, culture, and political issues

in studying process of implementation of the KMS

initiatives. This approach proved to be suitable for

analyzing the KMS initiatives, since their

implementation are not only concerned about IT, but

also put emphasis on the contextual environment in

with they are embedded. Based on this

comprehensive analysis, the pattern of the common

process in KMS initiatives together with the

SoftSystemsMethodology-AConceptualModelofKnowledgeManagementSystemsInitiativesinMalaysianPublic

Universities



influencing factors were identified and highlighted.

It is clear that each activity has a different

influencing factor that can be classified into multiple

perspectives analysis. Activities 1, 2 and 3 and

management activity were concerned with the

influential factors of the organizational perspectives.

Consequently, activity 4 was influenced by technical

perspectives. Activity 5 was affected by personal

perspectives. The age of the university indicated that

the older MPUs have more challenging issues in

dealing with the technical, organisational, and

personal perspectives, compared to the newer

MPUs. From the technical perspectives, the

existence of several established technologies acts as

a barrier for the older MPUs because they must be

considered if they want to utilise newer

technologies. In addition, the size of these old

universities makes them more complex and more

costly to maintain compared to newer universities. It

is important for older universities to consider

changing IT in a slow and incremental process rather

than choosing a radical change (Ronnback and

Holmstrom, 2007). The analysis of organizational

perspectives shows that the older MPUs appear to be

more challenging of developing unified strategic

direction, managing of large knowledge resource,

creating appropriate policies and procedures, and

getting adequate financial support. The older the

organisation, the more stable the structure and have

a greater number of departments and thus generally

exhibit greater complexity in managing change

(Barnir et al., 2003); (Cranfield and Taylor, 2008).

In many cases, the older MPUs were more strongly

affected by personal perspective constraints than

were newer MPUs. The factors for this trend were

knowledge-sharing attitudes among KMS

champions and business departments. The older

organisations have more established organizational

behaviour that has become institutionalised and

business activities that have become routinised

compared to newer MPUs (Hannan and Freeman,

1984) In this way, the proposed conceptual model of

KMS initiatives can be used as an analytical tool to

guide the analysis of the process of implementing

KMS initiatives in higher education and can also be

applied as a guideline to support the introduction of

KMS initiatives, especially in the context of MPUs.

REFERENCES

Ajmal, M., Helo, P. & Keka, T., 2010. Critical Factors For

Knowledge Management In Project Business. Journal

Of Knowledge Management,, 14, 156-168.

Barnir, A., Gallaugher, J. M. & Auger, P., 2003. Business

Process Digitization, Strategy, And The Impact Of

Firm Age And Size: The Case Of The Magazine

Publishing Industry. Journal Of Business Venturing,

18, 789-815.

Baudoin, P., And Branschofsky, M., 2003. Implementing

An Institutional Repository: The Dspace Experience

At Mit. Science & Technology Libraries, 24, 31-45.

Bennetts, P., Wood-Harper, A. & Mills, S., 2000. An

Holistic Approach To The Anagement Of Information

Systems Development:A Review Using Soft Systems

Approach And Multiple Viewpoints. Systemic

Practice And Action Research, 13, 189-205.

Cain, T. J., Branin, J. J. & Sherman, W. M., 2008.

Knowledge Management And The Academy:

Strategies And Solutions At The Ohio State University

Are Changing How Expertise And Knowledge Are

Documented And Shared. Educause Quarterly, 31, 26-

33.

Chan, D. L. H., Kwok, C. S. Y. & Yip, S. K. F., 2005.

Changing Roles Of Reference Librarians: The Case Of

The Hkust Institutional Repository. Reference Services

Review, 33, 268-282.

Chang, S.-H., 2003. Institutional Repositories: The

Library's New Role Oclc Systems & Services, 19, 77-

79(3).

Checkland, P., 1981. Systems Thinking, Systems Practice,

Chichester, John Wiley & Sons.

Cranfield, D. J. & Taylor, J., 2008. Knowledge

Management And Higher Education: A Uk Case

Study. The Electronic Journal Of Knowledge

Management.

Cronin, B. & Davenport, E., 2000. Knowledge

Management In Higher Education. In: Bernbaum, G.

(Ed.) Knowledge Management And The Information

Revolution Educause Leadership Strategies Series.

San Franciso, Ca: Josey-Bass Inc.

Daft, R. L., 2007. Organization Theory And Design, Ohio,

Thomson Higher Education.

Hannan, M. T. & Freeman, J., 1984. Structural Inertia And

Organizational Change. American Sociological

Review, 49, 149--164.

Holsapple, C. W. & Joshi, K. D., 2000. An Investigation

Of Factors That Influence The Management Of

Knowledge In Organisations. Journal Of Strategic

Information Systems, 9, 235-261.

Ingram, H., 2000. Using Soft Systems Methodology To

Manage Hotels: A Case Study. Managing Service

Quality, 10, 6-10.

Joshi, J., Ghafoor, A., Aref, W. & Spafford, E., 2001.

Digital Government Security Infrastructure Design

Challenges. Ieee Computer, 34, 66-72.

Markus, M. L., 1983. Power, Politics And Mis

Implementation. Communications Of The Acm, 26,

430-444.

Mcdermott, R. & O’dell, C., 2001. Overcoming Cultural

Barriers To Sharing Knowledge. Overcoming Cultural

Barriers To Sharing Knowledge, 5, 76-85.

Mohayidin, M. G., Azirawani, N., Kamaruddin, M. N. &

Margono, M. I., 2007. The Application Of Knowledge

KMIS2012-InternationalConferenceonKnowledgeManagementandInformationSharing

Management In Enhancing The Performance Of

Malaysian Universities. The Electronic Journal Of

Knowledge Management, 5, 301-312.

Moon, M. J., 2002. The Evolution Of E-Government

Among Municipalities: Rhetoric Or Reality? Public

Administration Review, 62, 424-433.

Norris, D. F., Fletcher, P. D. & Holden.S., 2001. Is Your

Local Government Plugged In? Highlights Of The

2000 Electronic Government Survey. Available:

Www.Umbc.Edu/Mipar/Final_Draft/Pdfs/E-Gov.Icma

.Final-4-25-01.Pdf.

Oakley, A., 2003. Research Evidence, Knowledge

Management And Educational Practice: Early Lessons

From A Systematic Approach. London Review Of

Education, 1, 21-33.

Patricia Ordóñez De Pablos, 2004. Measuring And

Reporting Structural Capital: Lessons From European

Learning Firms. Journal Of Intellectual Capital, 5,

629-647.

Petkov, D., Petkova, O., T, A. & T, N., 2007. Systems

Thinking Techniques For Decision Support In

Complex Situations. Decision Support Systems, 43,

1615-1629.

Pieris, C., David, L. & William, M., 2003. Excellence In

Knowledge Management: An Empirical Study To

Identify Critical Factors And Performance Measure.

Measure Business Excellence, 7, 29-45.

Ronald D. F & K., U., 2007. Knowledge Management

Capability: Defining Knowledge Assets. Journal Of

Knowledge Management, 11, 94-109.

Serban, A. M. & Luan, J., 2002. Knowledge Management:

Building A Comparative Advantage In Higher

Education, Jossey-Bass.

Singh, M. D. & Kant, R., 2008. Knowledge Management

Barriers: An Interpretive Structure Modeling

Approach. International Journal Of Management

Science And Engineering Management, 3, 141-150.

Soliman, F. & Spooner, K., 2000. Strategies For

Implementing Knowledge Management: Role Of

Human Resources Management. Journal Of

Knowledge Management, 4, 337-345.

Suhaimee, S., Abu Bakar, A. Z. & Alias, R. A.:

Knowledge Management Implementation In

Malaysian Public Institution Of Higher Education. In:

In Proceedings Of The 2nd International Conference

On Intellectual Capital, Knowledge Management And

Organisational Learning, 2005 Dubai.

Syed Omar Sharifuddin, S. I. & Rowland, F., 2004.

Benchmarking Knowledge Management In A Public

Organisation In Malaysia. Benchmarking: An

International Journal,

11, 238-266.

Tseng, S., 2008. The Effects Of Information Technology

On Knowledge Management Systems. Expert Systems

With Applications, 35, 150-160.

Walsham, G., 1993. Interpreting Information Systems In

Organizations, Wiley, Chichester.

Wong, K. Y., 2005. Critical Success Factors For

Implementing Knowledge Management In Small And

Medium Enterprises. Industrial Management And

Data Systems, 105, 261-279.

Zakareya Ebrahim, Z. I., 2005. E-Government Adoption:

Architecture And Barriers. Business Process

Management Journal, 11, 589-611.

SoftSystemsMethodology-AConceptualModelofKnowledgeManagementSystemsInitiativesinMalaysianPublic

Universities