شناسایی و تبیین پیشایندها و پسایندهای معماری دانش منابع انسانی با استفاده از رویکرد آمیخته

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری مدیریت منابع انسانی، دانشگاه لرستان، خرم آباد، ایران

2 استادگروه مدیریت بازرگانی، دانشگاه لرستان، خرم آباد، ایران

3 دانشیار، گروه مدیریت، دانشکده اقتصاد و علوم اداری، دانشگاه لرستان، خرم آباد، ایران

4 دانشیار گروه مدیریت بازرگانی، دانشگاه لرستان، خرم آباد، ایران

چکیده

     معماری دانش دانش منابع انسانی ابزاری مهم برای ارزیابی دانش ضمنی نیروی انسانی، چارچوبی یکپارچه برای تبیین، استنتاج و حفظ دانش کارکنان در راستای اهداف استراتژیک سازمان است. پژوهش حاضر باهدف شناسایی و تبیین پیشایندها و پسایندهای معماری دانش منابع انسانی با استفاده از رویکرد دلفی فازی­ در سازمان‌های دانش‌بنیان انجام پذیرفت. این پژوهش از نوع پژوهش­های آمیخته با رویکرد کمی و کیفی در پارادایم استقرایی است که ازنظر هدف، کاربردی و ماهیت و روش، اکتشافی است. جامعه آماری پژوهش را 30 نفر از خبرگان شرکت­های دانش­بنیان استان لرستان تشکیل می­دهد که بر اساس اصل کفایت نظری و با استفاده از روش نمونه­گیری هدفمند انتخاب‌شده‌اند. در بخش کیفی برای گردآوری اطلاعات از مصاحبه نیمه ساختاریافته استفاده شد که روایی و پایایی آن با استفاده از ضریب CVR و آزمون کاپای ـ کوهن تأیید شد. و داده­های به‌دست‌آمده از مصاحبه با استفاده از نرم­افزار Atlas.ti و روش کدگذاری تحلیل شد و پیشایندها و پسایندهای معماری دانش منابع انسانی شناسایی شدند.. در بخش کمی برای گردآوری اطلاعات از پرسشنامه مقایسه زوجی استفاده شد که روایی و پایایی آن با استفاده از روایی محتوا و آزمون مجدد تأیید شد. و با استفاده از تکنیک دلفی فازی اولویت‌بندی پیشایندها و پسایندهای معماری دانش منابع انسانی انجام پذیرفت و مهم‌ترین عوامل و پیامدهای آن مشخص شد. نتایج پژوهش حاکی از آن است که از میان پیشایندهای معماری دانش منابع انسانی زیرساخت­های فناوری، توانمندی و مهارت کارکنان، رفتار (اقدامات) کارکنان، چگونگی (چرایی) تحول دانش و تجمیع و ذخیره‌سازی دانش (محتوا) به‌عنوان مهم‌ترین عوامل به وجود آورنده معماری دانش در سازمان‌های دانش‌بنیان است. همچنین نتایج نشان داد که افزایش خلاقیت و نوآوری، ایجاد سازمانی پیشرو، بازیابی و بهبود دانش، چابکی سازمانی، کسب مزیت رقابتی پایدار و ایجاد سازمانی یادگیرنده ازجمله مهم‌ترین پسایندها یا پیامدهای معماری دانش منابع انسانی در سازمان­های دانش­بنیان است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Identifying and Explaining Effective Factors and Outcomes of Human Resources Knowledge Architecture Using Mixed approach

نویسندگان [English]

  • Abdollah Saedi 1
  • Reza Sepahvand 2
  • Seyed Najmeddin Mousavi 3
  • Mohammad Hakkak 4
1 Ph.D Human Resources Management, Lorestan University, Khoramabad,,Iran
2 Associate Prof, Department Business Management , Lorestan University, Khoramabad,Iran
3 Associate Prof., Management Department, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran
4 Associate Prof, Department of Business Management, Lorestan University, Khoramabad,Iran
چکیده [English]

Extended Abstract
Abstract
Human Resources Knowledge Architecture An important tool for evaluating the implicit knowledge of human resources is the integrated framework for explaining, deducing and maintaining employee knowledge in line with the organization's strategic goals. The present study aims Identification and explanation Effective factors and outcomes of Human Resources Knowledge Architecture Using approach Delphi Fuzzy In knowledge-based organizations conducted. This approach combined with quantitative and qualitative research among the preceding studies on inductive deductive paradigm is that in terms of purpose, functional and terms of the nature and methods descriptive. The statistical population of the present study consists of knowledge workers of Lorestan province, whose 30 experts have been selected based on the principle of theoretical adequacy and using a targeted sampling method. In the qualitative part of the study, semi-structured interviews were used for data collection. The validity and reliability of the questionnaire were verified using CVR coefficient and Kaplan-Cohen test. In addition, a quantitative comparison questionnaire was used to collect information. The validity and reliability of the questionnaire was verified using content validity and re-test. In the qualitative section, the data obtained from the interview were analyzed using the Atlas.ti software and the coding method. And the human resources knowledge architects has been identified. Also, in the quantitative part of the research, using the Delphi Fuzzy technique, the prioritization of human resource knowledge architectures and extensions was made and the most important factors and consequences were identified. The results of the research indicate that among the Antecedents in human resource knowledge architecture Technology Infrastructure, Capabilities and skills of employees, Employee behavior (actions), How (Why) Knowledge Transformation And the accumulation and storage of knowledge (content) as the main factors creating the knowledge architecture in knowledge-based organizations. Also, the results showed that Increasing creativity and innovation, Leading organization, Retrieve and improve knowledge, organizational agility, Sustainable competitive advantage and organizational learning Including most important Postgraduates or implications of human resource knowledge architecture is in student organizations.
Introduction
With close look at the rapid and increasing progress over the past few years, new relationships and evolving organizations are emerging. Changes and developments that will bring countless surprises such as deadly competitions, unprecedented opportunities, breathtaking changes and varied needs for organizations. On the other hand, with the emergence of new philosophies and technologies and the rapid movement of human and organizational societies towards science societies, that Organizations are constantly looking for ways and approaches to adapt to today's changing situation. In other words, one can admit that it is useless to compete on price or to use past solutions to deal with workplace threats. Therefore, in order to be competitive, organizations must be able to offer new products and services through new knowledge to ensure their success in different fields. Therefore, the importance of knowledge as a competitive advantage and opens your face falls draw other factors. It is clear that our understanding the concepts and new approaches to determine the location and how to gain and exchange knowledge for effective response to changes in opportunities and makes sure the lead. This approach is referred to in the management literature as the Human Resources Knowledge Architecture. A paradigm that has become a necessity with a value-added, forward-looking solution in the field of knowledge for the survival of the organization.
Research Methodology
The present research is based on mixed research, both in quantitative and qualitative terms and in the inductive paradigm. Which is exploratory in terms of purpose, application, and nature. Since this study is a mix of research, therefore, should be provided qualitative and quantitative research methodology separately. The statistical population of the study consists of  knowledge-based organizations in Lorestan province. According to the obtained data, their number is equal to 16 companies. Therefore, the statistical population of the study consisted of senior and middle managers of knowledge companies of Lorestan province, using a purposive sampling method and based on their field of activity, 30 individuals were selected as sample members. As such, it was collected from each domain (industrial, services, manufacturing, and pharmacy) based on the principle of theoretical competence, to the extent of data saturation. Data gathering tool was qualitative part of semi-structured interview research whose validity and reliability were confirmed by CVR coefficient and Kappa-Cohen test, respectively. The data gathering tool in the quantitative part is a paired comparison questionnaire whose validity and reliability were confirmed by content validity and test-retest, respectively.
findings
The findings of the study consist of two parts qualitative and quantitative. Thus, in the qualitative part, the antecedents and consequences of the human resources knowledge architecture were identified in an interview with experts. It is worth noting how the extraction human resources knowledge architecture antecedents and consequences is accomplished by examining interview texts using Atlas.ti software as well as live coding. In the quantitative part of the research, using the fuzzy Delphi approach, the variables were prioritized and identified the most important antecedents and consequences of human resources knowledge architecture.
Discussion and Results
Knowledge-based corporations have had a significant impact on the growth and development of different regions with the evolution of science and knowledge and the discovery of new economic findings and results. These companies play an important role in the economic growth and development of societies by commercializing their ideas and achievements. The results of this study include identifying and prioritizing human resources knowledge architecture antecedents and consequences in knowledge -based organizations. In this study, fourteen factors were identified as antecedents or, in other words, the human resources knowledge architecture in knowledge- based organizations. In addition, the results suggest that in the knowledge-based companies fourteen or consequences of the aftermath of human resources knowledge architecture.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Human Resources Knowledge Architecture
  • knowledge-based organizations
  • Fuzzy Delphi Technique
1-Abdollahi, M & Hosseinzade, A (2018). The Effect of Knowledge Architecture On organizational identity Emphasizing the role of mediator of psychological empowerment and social capital(Case study: Mashhad Municipality staff), Journal of Social Sciences, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Fifteenth year, 113-142. (In Persian)
2-Allameh, S,H,. Asgari, N & Crazypoul, J (2016). An examination of organizational culture On organizational performance: Emphasizing the role of knowledge sharing And organizational agility with a balanced scorecard approach, Management organizational culture, 14(2),453-474. (In Persian)
3-Alvesson M & Karreman D. (2001) Odd couple: making sense of the curious concept of Knowledge Management. Journal of Management Studies, 38 (7), 996-1018.
4-Atapattu, M & Ranawake, G (2017). Transformational and Transactional LeadershipBehaviours and their E®ect on KnowledgeWorkers' Propensity for KnowledgeManagement Processes, Journal of Information & Knowledge Management, 16(3), 1-23.
5-Atapattu, M (2018). High performance work practices and knowledge workers’ propensity for knowledge management processes, Knowledge Management Research & Practice,1-11.

6-Balamurugan, A & Abdul Zubar, H (2019). An integrated approach to performance measurement, analysis, improvements and knowledge management in healthcare sector, International Journal of Knowledge Management Studies, 10(1), 84-99.

7-Barbosa, P., Gonçalves, A., Simonetti, V & Leitao, A (2009). A Proposed Architecture for Implementing a Knowledge Management System in the Brazilian National Cancer Institute, Brazilian Administration Review, 6(3), 247-262.
8-Bardolet, C., Sellens, J & Royo, M (2018). Knowledge Workers and Job Satisfaction: Evidence from Europe, Springer Science +Business Media, LLC, J Knowl Econ, 1-25.
9-Bierly, P.E, Kessler & E.W Christensen (2000). Organizational learning, knowledge and wisdom. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 13(6), 595–618.
10-Boschma, R. A. (2005). Proximity and innovation: A critical assessment. Regional Studies, 39, 61–74.
11-Bourdreau, A & Couillard, G (1999). Systems integration and knowledge management.Information Systems Management, Fall, 24–32.

12-Calantone, R., Cavusgil. S.T & Zhao, Y (2002). Learning orientation, firm innovation capability, and firm performance, Industrial Marketing Management 31(6),515-524.

13-Chevron, J. S. (2001). Developing an integrated enterprise-wide knowledge architecture. Paper presented at the APQC conference of Next Generation KM, APQC, Houston, TX: pp. 1-20
14-Clark, T & Rollo, C (2001). Corporate initiatives in knowledge management. Education +Training, 4(5) 206–241.
15-Darroch, J (2005). Knowledge management, innovation, and firm performance, Journal of Knowledge Management,. 3(9), 101–115,.
16-Dragoni, M,. Tonell, S & Moretti, G (2017). A Knowledge Management Architecture for Digital Cultural Heritage, Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage, 10(3), 1-18. 
17-Evers, H. D. (2008). Knowledge hubs and knowledge clusters: Designing a knowledge architecture for development. Paper presented at the conference of Knowledge Architecture for Development: Challenges ahead for Asian Business and Governance, Singapore, SMU.
18-Govender, L., Peruma, R & Perumal, S (2018). Knowledge management as a strategic tool for human resource management at higher education institutions, South African Journal of Information Management, 20(1), 1-10.
19-Huang, T.-P. (2011). Comparing motivating work characteristics, job satisfaction, and turnover intention of knowledge workers and blue-collar workers, and testing a structural model of the variables’relationshipsin China and Japan.The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(4), 924–944.

20-James,  M (2019). Knowledge acquisition and firm competitiveness: the role of complements and knowledge source, Journal of Knowledge Management, 23(1), 46-66.

21-Kamhawi, E (2010). The three tiers architecture of knowledge flow andmanagement activities, Information and Organization, 7(1), 169- 186.
22-Kianto,A., Shujahat, M,.  Hussain, S., Nawaz, F & Ali, M (2018). The impact of knowledgemanagement on knowledgeworker productivity, Baltic Journal of Management, 1-21.
23-Lasnik, V. E. (2000). Architects of knowledge: an emerging hybrid profession for educational communications, in: STC’s 50th Annual Conference, Dallas TX. pp.: 132-136.
24-Makowsky, M & Wang, S (2017). Embezzlement,Whistleblowing, and Organizational Architecture: An Experimental Investigation, .Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 15(4), 1-44.     
25-Mishra, P., Kishore, S & Shivani,Sh (2018). The Role of Information Technology for Knowledge Management: An Empirical Study of the IndianCoal Mining Industry, Journal of Global Information Technology Management,21(3), 208-225.
26-Mohammadi Fateh, A & Joker, A (2012). Establishment of knowledge management In the armed forces, Providing comparative mining of aerospace industries in other countries, Military management, 44(11), 123-158. (In Persian)
27- Nazari, A. Salarirad, M.M. and Bazzazi, A.A., 2012.Landfill site selection by decision-making tools based on fuzzy multi-attribute decision-making method. Environmental Earth Sciences, 65(6),1631-1642.
28-Ravi V. & Shanker R. (2005). Analysis of interactions among the barriers of reverse logistics; Technological Forecasting and Social Changes,72.
29-Royal, C,. Evans, J & Windsor, S (2014). The missing strategic link – human capital knowledge, and risk in thefinance industry – two mini case studies, An InternationalJournal of Entrepreneurial Finance, 16(3), 189-206.
30-Ruzicic, V & Micic, Z (2017). Creating a strategic national knowledge architecture: A comparative analysis of knowledge source innovation in the ICS subfields of multimedia and IT security, journal computers & security, 18(5),  455-466.
31-Saldena, J (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers, Translator, Guywan, Abdullah, Scientific and Cultural Publishing Company.
32-Sandkuhl, K (2015). Patten-Based Knowledge Architecture For Information Logistics, Revista Investigacion Operacional, 36(1), 36-44.
33-Snyman, R., and C. J. Kruger. 2004. The interdependency between strategic management and strategic knowledge management. Journal of knowledge management 8, 5-19.
34-Sowa, J. F. (2000). Knowledge Representation: Logical, Philosophical,and Computational Foundations (p. 608). Pacific Grove: BrooksCole Publishing Co. ISBN 0-534-94965-7.
35-Tayebi Abolhasani, A. H & Khodabakhshi, M (2017). Factors Affecting the Resilience of Human Resource Knowledge In knowledge-based organizationas, Human Resources Management Research, 2(28), 167-192. (In Persian)
36-Tsai, S (2018). Innovative behaviour of knowledgeworkers and social exchange attributesoffinancial incentive: implicationsfor knowledge management, Journal of Knowledge Management, 22(8), 1757-1781.
37-Tyugu, E (2005). Understanding knowledge architectures, Knowledge-Based Systems, 19(3), 50- 56.
38-Veraei, T,. Habibi, J & Mohagher, A (2016). The proposed conceptual framework for the knowledge architecture of large-scale organizations, Processing and managing information, 32(2), 439-466. (In Persian)
39-Wickramasinghe, N. (2003). Do We Practise What We preach? Are Knowledge Management Systems in Practice Truly Reflective of Knowledge Management Systems in theory?. Business Process Management Journal, 9(3), 295-316.
40-Wipawayangkool, K &Teng, J (2018). Profiling knowledge workers’ knowledge sharingbehavior via knowledge internalization, Knowledge Management Research & Practice,9 (2), 1-14.
41-Wulf, A & Butel, B (2017). Knowledge sharing and collaborative relationships in business ecosystems and networks - a definition and a demarcation, Industrial Management & Data Systems, 8(4), 1-25.
42-Zaim, H., Keceli, Y., Jaradat, A., Kastrati, S (2018). The effects of knowledge management processes on human resource management: Mediating role of knowledge utilization, Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 9(3), 310-328.