The paper aims to propose a new Knowledge Management (KM) performance measurement model based on Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA). The proposed model was constructed using a two-level DEA model. It measures KM using 17 proxy measures correlated with the major KM processes. Data from 19 Malaysian higher educational institutions were collected using a questionnaire and analyzed using the proposed model. For every institution, the model provides a single KM performance score together with performance scores of the major KM processes. Furthermore, the results indicate the specific KM areas that an organization should improve. The results can also be used by the institutions to determine their future KM strategies and targets. Finally, directions for future research are identified and suggested.
AdlerNGolanyB (2002) Including principal component weights to improve discrimination in data envelopment analysis. The Journal of the Operational Research Society53(9): 985–991.
2.
AhnJHChangSG (2004) Assessing the contribution of knowledge to business performance: the KP3 methodology. Decision Support Systems36(4): 403–416.
3.
AlaviMLeidnerDE (2001) Review: knowledge management and knowledge management systems: conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly25(1): 107–136.
4.
AroraR (2002) Implementing KM: a balanced scorecard approach. Journal of Knowledge Management6(3): 240–249.
5.
BontisNDragonettiNCJacobsonKRoosG (1999) The knowledge toolbox: a review of the tools available to measure and manage intangible resources. European Management Journal17(4): 391–404.
6.
BrookingA (1997) The management of intellectual capital. Journal of Long Range Planning30(3): 364–365.
7.
BrownJSDuguidP (1998) Organizing knowledge. California Management Review40(3): 90–111.
8.
ChampikaLTahaETabarakBQiupingL (2009) Knowledge communication and translation – a knowledge transfer model. Journal of Knowledge Management13(3): 118–131.
9.
CharnesACooperWWRhodesEL (1978) Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research2(6): 429–444.
10.
ChenAPChenMY (2005) A review of survey research in knowledge management performance measurement: 1995–2004. Journal of Information Science31(5): 381–393.
11.
ChinKSLoKCLeungJPF (2010) Development of user-satisfaction-based knowledge management performance measurement system with evidential reasoning approach. Expert Systems with Applications37(1): 366–382.
12.
ChuangSH (2004) A resource-based perspective on knowledge management capability and competitive advantage: an empirical investigation. Expert Systems with Applications27(3): 459–465.
13.
CostaRAMeiraSRLJucáPMRibeiroRA (2010) Qualitative analysis of a social knowledge management initiative in an innovation institution. In: the 14th International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design, Shanghai, China, 14–16 April 2010, pp: 251–256. IEEE.
14.
DalkirKWisemanEShulhaMMcIntyreS (2007) An intellectual capital evaluation approach in a government organization. Management Decision45(9): 1497–1509.
15.
DavenportTHPrusakL (2000) Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know, Harvard Business School Press, Massachusetts, MA.
16.
De JarnettL (1996) Knowledge the latest thing: information strategy. The Executives Journal12(2): 3–5.
17.
EdvinssonL (1997) Developing intellectual capital at Skandia. Journal of Long Range Planning30(3): 366–373.
18.
FanZPFengBSunYHOuW (2009) Evaluating knowledge management capability of organizations: a fuzzy linguistic method. Expert Systems with Applications36(2, Part 2): 3346–3354.
19.
GoldoniVOliveiraM (2010) Knowledge management metrics in software development companies in Brazil. Journal of Knowledge Management14(2): 301–313.
20.
GooijerJD (2000) Designing a knowledge management performance framework. Journal of knowledge management4(4): 303–310.
21.
GrossmanM (2006) An overview of KM assessment approaches. Journal of American Academy of Business8(2): 242–247.
22.
GrovesS (2002) Knowledge wins in the new economy. Information Management Journal36(2): 6.
23.
HammondCJ (2002) Efficiency in the provision of public services: a data envelopment analysis of UK public library systems. Applied Economics34(5): 649–657.
24.
HoCT (2009) The relationship between knowledge management enablers and performance. Industrial Management and Data Systems109(1): 98–117.
25.
JiangXLiY (2009) An empirical investigation of knowledge management and innovative performance: the case of alliances. Research Policy38(2): 358–368.
26.
JingTYoshiteruNAndrzejPW (2009) Knowledge management and knowledge creation in academia: a study based on surveys in a Japanese research university. Journal of Knowledge Management13(2): 76–92.
27.
JosuneSNekaneAOlgaR (2009) Knowledge sharing and innovation performance: A comparison between high-tech and low-tech companies. Journal of Intellectual Capital10(1): 22–36.
28.
KaplanRSNortonDP (1996) Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system. Harvard Business Review, January-February, pp.75–85.
29.
KlugeJSteinWLichtT (2001), Knowledge Unplugged: The Mckinsey and Company Global Survey on Knowledge Management, New York: Palgrave.
30.
KuahCTWongKY (2011) Efficiency assessment of universities through data envelopment analysis. Procedia Computer Science3: 499–506.
LeeKCLeeSKangIW (2005) KMPI: measuring knowledge management performance. Information and Management42(3): 469–482.
33.
LiYHHuangJWTsaiMT (2009) Entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance: the role of knowledge creation process. Industrial Marketing Management38(4): 440–449.
34.
LiaoSMXuSH (2006) The road map to km evaluation in organization: a holistic framework. In: 2006 International Conference on Management Science and Engineering, Lille, France, 5–7 October 2006, pp.1393–1398. IEEE.
35.
LiebowitzJ (1999) Key ingredients to the success of an organization's knowledge management strategy. Knowledge and Process Management6(1): 37–40.
36.
LoKCChinKS (2009) User-satisfaction-based knowledge management performance measurement. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management26(5): 449–468.
MurrayP (2002) Knowledge management as a sustained competitive advantage. Ivey Business Journal66(4): 71–76.
39.
NonakaI (1994) A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science5(1): 14–37.
40.
PervaizKAhmedKLimKZairiM (1999) Measurement practice for knowledge management. Journal of Workplace Learning11(8): 304–311.
41.
QuintasPLefrerePJonesG (1997) Knowledge management: a strategic agenda. Journal of Long Range Planning30(3): 385–391.
42.
RanjitB (2004) Knowledge management metrics. Industrial Management and Data Systems104(6): 457–468.
43.
RobinsonHSCarrilloPMAnumbaCJAl-GhassaniAM (2005) Performance measurement in knowledge management. In: AnumbaCJEgbuCOCarrilloPM (eds) Knowledge Management in Construction. Wiley-Blackwell, pp.10–30.
44.
RodovILeliaertP (2002) FiMIAM: financial method of intangible assets measurement. Journal of Intellectual Capital3(3): 323–336.
45.
RoosJRoosGDragonettiNEdvinssonL (1998), Intellectual Capital: Navigating in the New Business Landscape, New York: New York University Press.
46.
SamoilenkoSOsei-BrysonKM (2008) Increasing the discriminatory power of DEA in the presence of the sample heterogeneity with cluster analysis and decision trees. Expert Systems with Applications34(2): 1568–1581.
47.
SveibyKE (1997) The intangible assets monitor. Journal of Human Resource Costing and Accounting2(1): 25–36.
48.
ToftenKOlsenS (2003) Export market information use, organizational knowledge and firm performance. International Marketing Review20(1): 95–110.
WongKY (2005) Critical success factors for implementing knowledge management in small and medium enterprises. Industrial Management and Data Systems105(3): 261–279.
51.
ZhangR (2010) The application of the balanced scorecard in performance assessment of knowledge management. In: 2nd IEEE International Conference on Information Management and Engineering, Chengdu, China, 16–18 April 2010, pp. 443–447. IEEE.
