Determinants of knowledge management with information technology support impact on firm performance | Information Technology and Management Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Determinants of knowledge management with information technology support impact on firm performance

  • Published:
Information Technology and Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The relationship between knowledge management (KM) and firm performance has been the subject of discussion in management literature. However, certain studies have found a significant link between KM and firm performance, whereas others have not. Thus, to better understand the effect of KM on firm performance, this study focuses on the performance effects of KM with information technology support (KMIT). The model of this paper includes three organizational factors: structure, culture, and incentive. Surveys collected from 119 high tech firms were analyzed to test the model. The results confirmed the effect of organizational factors on overall KMIT, which was found to be critical for improving firm performance. Our study has implications for academics and practitioners by providing a better understanding of the importance of KM in explaining firm performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alavi M, Leidner DE (2001) Review: knowledge management and knowledge management systems: conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quart 25(1):107–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Anonymous (2002) UK companies fail to benefit from knowledge management. Manag Serv 7–7

  3. Barua A, Kriebel C, Mukhopadhyay T (1995) Information technology and business value: an analytic and empirical investigation. Inform Syst Res 6(1):3–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bentler PM (1992) On the fit of models to covariances and methodology to the bulletin. Psychol Bull 112(3):400–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bentler PM, Bonett DG (1980) Significance tests and goodness-of-fit in the analysis of covariance structure. Psychol Bull 88(3):588–606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bollen K (1989) Structural equations with latent variables. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  7. Brown CV (1999) Horizontal mechanisms under differing IS organization contexts. MIS Quart 23(3):421–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Brown CV, Magill SL (1998) Reconceptualizing the context-design issue for the information systems function. Organ Sci 9(2):176–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Browne MW, Cudeck R (1993) Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: Bollen KA, Long JS (eds) Testing structural equation models. Sage, Newbury Park, pp 136–162

    Google Scholar 

  10. Carr NG (2003) IT doesn’t matter. Harvard Bus Rev 81(5):41–49

    Google Scholar 

  11. Chen HH, Pang C (2010) Organizational forms for knowledge management in photovoltaic solar energy industry. Knowl-Based Syst 23(8):924–933

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Christmann P (2000) Effects of “best practices”of environmental management on cost advantage: the role of complementary assets. Acad Manage J 43(4):663–680

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Compton J (2001) Dial K for knowledge. CIO 14(17):136

    Google Scholar 

  14. Conner KR, Prahalad CK (1996) A resource-based theory of the firm: knowledge versus opportunism. Organ Sci 7:477–501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Davenport TH (1999) Knowledge management and broader firm: Strategy, advantage, and performance. In: Liebowitz J (ed) Knowledge management handbook. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 2-1–2-11

    Google Scholar 

  16. Dedrick J, Gurbaxani V, Kraemer KL (2003) Information technology and economic performance: a critical review of the empirical evidence. ACM Comput Surv 35(1):1–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Deshpande R, Jarley U, Webster F (1993) Corporate culture, customer orientation, and innovativeness in Japanese firms: a quadrad analysis. J Marketing 57(1):23–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Drew S (1999) Building knowledge management into strategy: making sense of a new perspective. Long Range Plann 32(1):130–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Farjoun M (1998) The independent and joint effects of the skill and physical bases of relatedness in diversification. Strategic Manage J 19(7):611–630

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Fornell C, Larcker D (1987) A second generation of multivariate analysis: Classification of methods and implications for marketing research. In: Houston MJ (ed) Review of marketing Chicago, American Marketing Association, pp 407–450

  21. Galbraith JR (1973) Designing complex organizations. Addison-Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  22. Gold AH, Malhotra A, Segars AH (2001) Knowledge management: an organizational capabilities perspective. J. Manage. Inform. Syst 18(1):185–214

    Google Scholar 

  23. Grant RM (1988) On ‘Dominant Logic’, relatedness and the link between diversity and performance. Strategic Manage J 9(6):639–642

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Grant RM (1996) Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments: organizational capability as knowledge integration. Organ Sci 7(4):375–387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Grant RM (1996) Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Manage J 17(Winter):109–122

    Google Scholar 

  26. Grover V, Davenport T (2001) General perspectives on knowledge management: fostering a research agenda. J Manage Inform Syst 18(1):5–21

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hahn J, Subramani MR (2000) A framework of knowledge management systems: Issues and challenges for theory and practices. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Information Systems, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, pp 302–312

  28. Hall R, Andriani P (1998) Analysing intangible resources and managing knowledge in supply chain context. Eur Manag J 16(6):685–697

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Hedlund G (1994) A model of knowledge management and the N-form corporation. Strateg Manag J 15(Summer):73–90

    Google Scholar 

  30. Hitt LM, Brynjolfesson E (1997) Information technology and internal firm organization: an empirical analysis. J Manag Inform Syst 14(2):81–101

    Google Scholar 

  31. Holsapple CW, Joshi KD (2001) Organizational knowledge resource. Decis Support Syst 31:39–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Jackson C (1999) Process to product: creating tools for knowledge management. Available online at http://www.brint.com/members/online/120205/jackson

  33. Khandelwal VK, Gottschalk P (2003) Information technology support for interorganizational knowledge transfer: an empirical study of law firms in Norway and Australia. Infor Resour Manag J 16(1):14–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Kim JS, Amold P (1992) Manufacturing competence and business performance: a framework and empirical analysis. Int J Oper Prod Man 13(10):4–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Kogut B, Zander U (1992) Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organ Sci 3:383–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Kogut B, Zander U (1996) What firms do? coordination, identity, & learning. Organ Sci 7(5):502–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kulkarni UR, Ravindran S, Freeze R (2007) A knowledge management success model: theoretical development and empirical validation. J Manag Inform Syst 23(3):309–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Lai J, Wang C, Chou C (2009) How knowledge map fit and personalization affect success of KMS in high-tech firms. Technovation 29(4):313–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Lee H, Choi B (2003) Knowledge management enablers, processes, and organizational performance: an integrative view and empirical examination. J Manag Inform Syst 20(1):179–228

    Google Scholar 

  40. Leonard-Barton D (1995) Wellsprings of knowledge: building and sustaining the source of innovation. Harvard Business School Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  41. Liao C, Chuang S, To P (2011) How knowledge management mediates the relationship between environment and organizational structure. J Bus Res 64(7):728–736

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Liao C, Chuang SH (2006) Exploring the role of knowledge management for enhancing firm’s innovation and performance. Thirty-Ninth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-39), Koloa, Hawaii, USA, pp 1–10

  43. Malone TW, Crowston K, Lee J, Pentland B (1999) Tools for inventing organizations: toward a handbook or organizational processes. Manag Sci 45(3):425–443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Markus ML (2001) Toward a theory of knowledge reuse: types of knowledge reuse situations and factors in reuse success. J Manag Inform Syst 18(1):57–93

    Google Scholar 

  45. Marsh HW, Hocevar D (1985) Application of confirmatory factory analysis to the study of self-concept: first-and higher-order factor models and their invariance across groups. Psychol Bull 97(3):562–582

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. McEvily SK, Chakravarthy B (2002) The persistence of knowledge-based advantage: an empirical test for product performance and technological knowledge. Strateg Manag J 23(4):285–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. McGahnan AM, Porter ME (1999) The persistence of shocks to profitability. Rev Econ Stat 81(1):143–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Meyer MH (1997) Revitalize your product lines through continuous platform renewal. Res Technol Manag 40(2):17–28

    Google Scholar 

  49. Meyer MH, Zack MH (1996) The design and development of information products. Sloan Manag Rev 37(3):43–59

    Google Scholar 

  50. Nonaka I (1994) A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organ Sci 5(1):14–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Nonaka I, Takeuchi H (1995) The knowledge creation company. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  52. Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee JY, Podsakoff NP (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol 88(5):879–903

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Porter ME (1985) Competitive advantage: creating and sustaining superior performance. Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  54. Prahalad CK, Bettis RA (1986) The dominant logic: a new linkage between diversity and performance. Strateg Manag J 7(6):485–501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Robins JA, Wiersema MF (1995) A resource-based approach to the multibusiness firm: empirical analysis of portfolio interrelationships and corporate financial performance. Strateg Manag J 16(4):277–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Sambamurthy V, Zmud RW (1999) Arrangements for information technology governance: a theory of multiple contingencies. MIS Quart 23(2):261–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Sanchez R, Mahoney JT (1996) Modularity, flexibility and knowledge management in product and organization design. Strateg Manag J 17:63–76

    Google Scholar 

  58. Schultze U, Leidner DE (2002) Studying knowledge management in information systems research: discourses and theoretical assumptions. MIS Quart 26(3):213–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Schulz M (2001) The uncertain relevance of newness: organizational learning and knowledge flows. Acad Manag J 44(4):661–681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Segars AH (1997) Assessing the unidimensionality of measurement: a paradigm and illustration within the context of information systems research. OMEGA 25(1):107–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Sharp D (2003) Knowledge management today: challenges and opportunities. Inform Syst Manag Spring: 32–37

  62. Tallon PP, Kraemer KL, Gurbaxani V (2000) Executives’ perceptions of the business value of information technology: a process-oriented approach. J Manag Inform Syst 16(4):145–173

    Google Scholar 

  63. Tanaka JS, Huba GJ (1984) Confirmatory hierarchical factor analysis of psychological distress measures. J Pers Soc Psychol 46(3):62–635

    Google Scholar 

  64. Tanriverdi H (2005) Information technology relatedness, knowledge management capability, and performance of multibusiness firms. MIS Quart 29(2):311–334

    Google Scholar 

  65. Tanriverdi H, Venkatraman V (2005) Knowledge relatedness and the performance of multibusiness firms. Strateg Manag J 26:97–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Wang E, Klein G, Jiang JJ (2007) IT support in manufacturing firms for a knowledge management dynamic capability link to performance. Int J Prod Res 45(11):2419–2434

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Wernerfelt B (1984) A resource-based view of the firm. Strateg Manag J 5(2):171–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Woodruff RB (1997) Customer value: the next source for competitive advantage. J Acad Market Sci 25(2):139–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Business Administration, Asia University, Wufeng, Taichung, 41354, Taiwan

    Shu-Hui Chuang

  2. Department of Information Management, National Chung Cheng University, Minxiong, Chiayi County, Taiwan

    Chechen Liao

  3. Master Program of Business Administration, National Taichung University of Education, West District, Taichung, Taiwan

    Shinyi Lin

Authors
  1. Shu-Hui Chuang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chechen Liao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shinyi Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shu-Hui Chuang.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 5.

Table 5 Constructs and measurement scales
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chuang, SH., Liao, C. & Lin, S. Determinants of knowledge management with information technology support impact on firm performance. Inf Technol Manag 14, 217–230 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10799-013-0153-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10799-013-0153-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation