Discovering the factors impacting the evaluation of knowledge management in the organizational domain

The knowledge, skills and experience possessed by employees, customers, suppliers and other stakeholders are major components of an organization\u27s Intellectual Capital, the effective management of which has been found to be critical for business success. In order to manage knowledge at an organizational level however, it is necessary to be able to define it in the context of the organization, measure its existence and, more importantly, assess how its creation, use, dissemination, evaluation and management impacts business performance and learning. Whilst the term Knowledge Management has evolved since the early nineties into a generally recognisable management discipline in its own right, significant literature over the past eight years has focussed on the management of knowledge as a more generic organizational competence making Knowledge Management Initiatives difficult to identify and define and even more difficult to evaluate. Despite the challenges, the subjects of knowledge management and intellectual capital are gaining strategic management exposure particularly in relation to how investment in, and outputs from, these initiatives can or should be evaluated. Knowledge management and intellectual capital are inextricably related, and whilst some previous research has gone into evaluating knowledge as an extension or derivative of information and into intellectual capital as a discrete item on the balance sheet, little has been done to analyse the development of models that attempt to evaluate the impact of knowledge management as an organizational process or capability. A comprehensive meta-analysis by literature review of international articles dealing with knowledge management and intellectual capital evaluation from a broad range of business and scientific journals was undertaken to identify precisely what has been measured by public and private sector organizations within the Knowledge Management, Intellectual Capital and other closely related domains between the years 1996 to 2002. By the end of 2002, human capital based measures were found to be the most frequently quoted in KM literature. Financial, human capital, internal infrastructure and composite measures such as the Balanced Scorecard have grown in varying degrees in frequency of use, whilst customer, process, intellectual property, innovation and quality related measures have gradually lost ground compared to other metrics between 1996 and 2002. Significant differences occur in the evaluation and reporting of KM initiatives amongst the main geographic regions of North America, Europe, Scandinavia and Japan, but these differences seem to be more related to public policy differences and to management style than to a result of any definitive or deliberate differences in formal evaluation plans and methodologies. Generally, KM evaluation between 1996 and 2002 has focussed on explicit (rather than tacit), internal (rather than external) and outcome (rather than process) oriented measurement processes. Inadequate accounting systems, lack of measurement and reporting standards, lack of long-term vision and poor understanding of the contribution of knowledge to competitive advantage have been and remain major constraints to the future development of KM

Evaluation of the Western Australian Department of Health telehealth project

In 1999, the Department of Health in Western Australia began a telehealth project, which finished in 2004. The 75 videoconferencing sites funded by the project were part of a total state-wide videoconference network of 104 sites. During the period from January 2002 to December 2003, a total of 3266 consultations, case reviews and patient education sessions took place. Clinical use grew to 30% of all telehealth activity. Educational use was approximately 40% (1416 sessions) and management use was about 30% (1031 sessions). The average overhead cost per telehealth session across all regions and usage types was $A192. Meaningful comparisons of the results of the present study with other public health providers were difficult, because many of the available Websites on telehealth were out of date. Despite the successful use of telehealth to deliver clinical services in Western Australia, sustaining the effort in the post-project phase will present significant challenges