ARTICLE INFO

Article Type

Descriptive & Survey Study

Authors

Nemati   M.A. (1)
Mohammadi   Y. (2)
Raeisoon   M.R. (*)






(*) Social Medicine Department, Medicine Faculty, Birjand University of Medical Sciences, Birjand, Iran
(1) Educational Sciences Department, Psychology & Educational Sciences Faculty, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran
(2) Education of Medical Sciences Development Center, Education of Medical Sciences Development Center, Birjand University of Medical Sciences, Birjand, Iran

Correspondence

Address: Postgraduate Office, Deputy of Education, Birjand University of Medical Sciences, Ayatollah Qaffari Street, Birjand, Iran
Phone: +985632448392
Fax: +985632448392
raeisoon49@gmail.com

Article History

Received:  July  21, 2015
Accepted:  September 14, 2015
ePublished:  October 25, 2015

BRIEF TEXT


… [1-5] Knowledge management is a combination of the processes of management, control, creativity, coding, dissemination and application of knowledge in an organization [3, 6]. Faculty members are professionals who are responsible for training and dissemination of knowledge at the university, and the knowledge quality and development largely depends on the operation of these members [7]. … [8] The best instructors are those who create the highest level of learning in their students, and learning has a special role [9]. … [10-14]

There is a significant relationship between all infrastructure dimensions and process of knowledge management and innovation [15]. Knowledge management has the essential potentiality for management system studies and future knowledge [16]. There is a significant relationship between knowledge sharing and innovation [17]. Organizational learning is a mediator between knowledge management and organizational innovation. In this process, like a system, knowledge management plays the input role and organizational leaning and innovation plays the output role [18].

The aim of this study was to investigate the correlation between knowledge management dimensions and educational performance of faculty members.

This is a cross-sectional study.

Payam-e-Noor faculty members of South Khorasan Province (Iran) were studied in 2014.

127 participants were selected through Stratified Random Sampling Method.

To determine the size of the sample, Krejcie and Morgan Table was used. To collect data, Standard Knowledge Management Questionnaire with 84 questions and a researcher-made questionnaire for educational performance with 18 questions which was based on five-point Likert Scale were used. Formal validity of the questionnaire was confirmed by professional university instructors and to determine the validity of the questionnaire, content validity was used by the researcher. To determine the reliability of the questionnaire, Cronbach`s Alpha was used showing 0.85 and 0.81 respectively. SPSS 14 software was used for data analysis. After examining the normality based on Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, data were analyzed using Pearson Correlation and Independent T-test.

The mean age of males was 46.4 ±5.2years (83 participants) and the mean age of females was 44.7 ± 4.2years (44 participants).The mean scores of knowledge management variable and its dimensions (knowledge creation, knowledge sharing, knowledge utilization, and knowledge storage) as well as the mean of educational performance score were higher in males than females. However, this difference was only statistically significant in knowledge management and its dimensions. Also, there was a significant difference between the mean score of knowledge management variables and its dimensions and university instructors` performance based on the level of education. However there was no significant difference between the scores of knowledge management variables and its dimensions and university instructors’ educational performance based on working experience (Table 1). The correlation coefficients between knowledge management and educational performance, knowledge creation and educational performance, knowledge sharing and educational performance, knowledge utilization and educational performance, and between knowledge saving and educational performance of university instructors were significant.

The results of this study showed that knowledge management dimensions could significantly predict and determine the performance of faculty members. There was a significant relation between the dimensions of knowledge management (knowledge dimension, knowledge sharing, knowledge utilization, and knowledge storage) and faculty members` educational performance. And all four dimensions of knowledge management had significant effect on the performance of faculty members. These findings are consistent with the results of some studies [19-21] while are not in line with the results of some other studies [22-24]. Conducting personal knowledge in line with educational objectives involves creating environment based on knowledge sharing, development and interaction between its members [17]. There is a difference between knowledge management and instructors` educational performance based on gender and level of education. This is in line with the results of some studies [25].

Knowledge management skills should be utilized using workshops for increasing knowledge, and university instructors should be given more freedom in their teaching duties.

Of the limitations of this study was the lack of on time responses of the university instructors to the questionnaire.

Knowledge management dimensions, as well as increasing the educational performance of faculty members, can predict their educational performance.

Department of Education and the faculty members of Birjand Payam-e-Noor University are appreciated.

The results of this study are not in any conflict with the interests of any person.

This study has been approved by Ethics Committee of Birjand Payam-e- Noor University.

Funding sources has been provided by the researcher.

TABLES and CHARTS

Show attach file


CITIATION LINKS

[1]Akbari Langrudi J, Mehdizadeh Marzanaki NA, Rajabali Tabar D. The role of knowledge management in empowering school principals. International Conference on Management, Challenges and Solutions; 2013, December 26.
[2]Nemati MA. Knowledge management, culture, and higher education. Technol Dev. 2008;2(7):28-35. [Persian]
[3]Dvenport TH‚ Prusak L. Working knowledge. 2nd edition. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press; 2000.
[4]Macdonald J. Understanding knowledge management. New Jersey: Princeton University Press; 1999.
[5]Qureshi FS‚ Ahmadi P. The role of knowledge management in educational institutions. Manag Tomorrow. 2008;7(20):17-24. [Persian]
[6]Adly F. Knowledge management: Moving beyond the knowledge. Tehran: Cognitive Thought; 2005.
[7]Yamani Duozi Sorkhabi M‚ Mozafari FA. The examination of effective factors on research experiences among graduate students at Shahid Beheshti University. Educ Psychol Stud. 2009;10(1):83-100. [Persian]
[8]Ghahramani M, Arefi M, Jamshidi L. Study the effect of student evaluation on faculty members’ educational performance between 2000-01 to 2005-06. Res Plan High Educ. 2008;14(2):1-26. [Persian]
[9]Nikrooz L, Roozitalab M, Rayegan Shirazi AR, Naghizadeh MM, Taghavi F. Student research projects inhibiting factors from the students perspective. J Fasa Uni Med Sci. 2012;2(2):113-9. [Persian]
[10]Karimian Z, Sabaghian Z, Sedghpour BS. An investigation of research and knowledge production obstacles and challenges in medical universities. High Educ Iran J. 2012;3(4):35-64. [Persian]
[11]Behnamfar R. Relationship of teaching and research; teacher or researcher?. Educ Strateg Med Sci. 2013;4(5):215-7. [Persian]
[12]Rajaipour S, Rahimi H. A study of the relationship between the changing process of knowledge management and the performance of university of Isfahan faculty members. J Executive Manag. 2009;8(31):59-76. [Persian]
[13]Qoltash A, Moslem S, Javdan M, Sina H. The relationship between organizational culture and organizational learning and knowledge management of faculty of Islamic Azad university. New Ideas Educ. 2011;7(1):69-85. [Persian]
[14]Niazi E. Investigation and analysis of knowledge management: Explained structural equation Case study of Mazandaran University. J Acad Librariansh Inf Res. 2012;46(60):119-40. [Persian]
[15]Konjkav Monfard AR, Ardakani S. An analysis of the status of knowledge management in higher education institutes and its relation with innovation. New Approach Educ Adm. 2014;5(17):10320. [Persian]
[16]Halawi LA. Knowledge management systems success in knowledge-based organizationas. Fort Lauderdale: NOVA South Eastern University; 2005.
[17]Kamasak R, Bulutlar F. The influence of knowledge sharing on innovation. Eur Bus Rev. 2010;22(3):306-17.
[18]Liao SH, Wu CC. System perspective of knowledge management, organizational learning, and organizational innovation. Expert Syst Appl. 2010;37(2):1096-103.
[19]Zack M, Mckeen J, Singh S. Knowledge management and organizational performance: An exploratory analysis. J Knowl Manag. 2009;13(6):392-409.
[20]Zaim H, Tatoglu E‚ Zaim S. Performance of knowledge management practices: A causal analysis. J Knowl Manag. 2007;11(6):54-67.
[21]Gold AH, Malhotra A‚ Segars AH. Knowledge management: An organizational capabilities perspective. J Manag Inf Syst. 2001;18(1):185-214.
[22]Hosseini SS. Feasibility in terms of knowledge management infrastructure necessary 8th Tehran municipality [Dissertation]. Tehran: Shahed University; 2010. [Persian]
[23]Adine Ghahramani A, Hashempour L‚ Atapour H. The study of knowledge management in view of university faculty members. J Acad Librariansh Inf Res. 2011;45(57):63-85. [Persian]
[24]Abunoory E, Saeidi P, Neyazi E‚ Zanganeh M. Investigate and explain the knowledge management infrastructure in selected universities. J Educ Manag Res. 2011;3(1):91-116. [Persian]
[25]Rajaeepour S, Bahrami S, Kamali DolatAbadi A, Shabani A. The relationship between the applications of knowledge management indices and faculty member’s educational performance in Isfahan university of medical sciences. Health Inf Manag. 2012;4(32):619-24. [Persian]