Plans versus people: Comparing knowledge management approaches in IT-enabled business projects
Introduction
Knowledge is an important resource for organizational tasks (Grant, 1996) and the management of knowledge affects an organization's ability to accomplish these tasks successfully (Wiig, 1997). In this paper, we consider knowledge management within projects (Gann and Salter, 2000, Lindner and Wald, 2011) and apply organizational knowledge management concepts recognizing that projects can be conceptualized as temporary organizations (Lundin and Soderholm, 1995, Packendorff, 1995). The specific context we consider is information technology (IT)-enabled business projects. These projects require the challenging combination and coordination of technical, organizational and business knowledge to achieve successful outcomes (Markus, 2004). Since knowledge is a key component of these projects, the IT-enabled business project provides a useful context in which knowledge management within projects can be studied.
In practice, knowledge in projects can be managed by focusing on knowledge embedded in plans and on knowledge embodied in people (Madhaven and Grover, 1998). In focusing on plans,1 knowledge management is directed towards codifying detailed, specific knowledge about the application domain in an effort to make explicit the shared understanding of future states (Wand and Weber, 1993, Khatri et al., 2006). In focusing on people, project managers encourage social interaction to build an environment enabling the integration of many kinds of knowledge from multiple sources to produce mutual understanding (Nonaka, 1991, Ruuska and Vartiainen, 2005).
The normative practice-oriented literature on projects tends to focus on plans and documents as the major knowledge deliverables en route to full project delivery (Reich and Wee, 2006). In contrast, much of the research literature attempts to counter-balance this emphasis on codification by demonstrating the importance of less explicit knowledge and the need for socialization, communities of practice and the development of shared understanding (Brown and Duguid, 1991, Bresnen et al., 2003, Nonaka and von Krogh, 2009). In an organizational context, Hansen et al. (1999) described the choice between plans and people as a choice between “codification” and “socialization” approaches to knowledge management. Reflective practitioners likely recognize the importance of both plan-based and people-based approaches. However, there are no studies that compare the effectiveness of these two perspectives and hence there is no research-based guidance as to the emphasis project managers should place on building comprehensive plans or building shared understanding among people as management approaches.
This paper is the third in a series which has investigated the concept of knowledge management within IT-enabled business projects. The first paper (Reich et al., 2012) conceptualized knowledge management as a three dimensional concept comprising knowledge stock, enabling environment and knowledge practices. We suggested that knowledge management enabled the creation and alignment of three types of project-based knowledge that are critical to achieving desired business outcomes: technical design knowledge, organizational change knowledge and business value knowledge. The factor analysis and regression testing of survey data from 212 IT projects statistically supported the model's conceptualization of the key constructs and showed that knowledge management within IT projects contributes to the creation and alignment of the important project-based knowledge.
The second paper (Reich et al., 2014) used structural equation modeling to test the relationships between knowledge management and various aspects of performance in IT-enabled business projects. Analysis of the previously collected survey data showed that project managers who achieve knowledge alignment among the people and the artifacts from three parts of the project – the IT team, the business change team, and the governance team – can have a significant positive impact on the achievement of business value from the project.
This paper investigates the question: “Which knowledge management approach has the stronger positive impact on project performance — managing plans or managing people?” We present a theoretical model of project-based knowledge management and examine evidence from the same survey data. The findings indicate that a people-based approach to knowledge management is critical to project performance. In addition, a plan-based approach that concentrates on aligning documents complements the people-based approach and contributes further to project performance.
The section that follows provides background for our theoretical model of knowledge management in projects. In this model, the focus is placed on the alignment of knowledge across three knowledge areas through both a codification and socialization process. Improved social and document alignment is theorized to lead to improved project performance as measured by the quality of the project outcome and the satisfaction of the organization with the outcome. The model is used to develop hypotheses regarding the impact of knowledge management on the production of documents, document alignment, social alignment and project performance outcomes. Measures of these constructs along with a survey method are described. Results from a structural equation model analysis are provided and these results are followed by a discussion and conclusion.
Section snippets
Background
The terms “knowledge” and “knowledge management” lack universal definitions (Nonaka and von Krogh, 2009). What they refer to often depends upon the context and level of analysis. For example, at the industry or firm level of analysis, the knowledge-based theory of the firm (Grant, 1996) suggests that knowledge be viewed as a strategically significant organizational resource embodied in multiple entities including organizational culture, policies, routines and employees. Alternatively, at the
Conceptual and theoretical models
This two-dimensional conception of knowledge alignment forms the basis of the conceptual model shown in Fig. 1. After this model is explained, the resulting theoretical model is presented in Fig. 2 and hypotheses which flow from it are described.
Hypotheses
There are seven hypotheses proposed in Fig. 2. Each is described below, with supporting literature and rationale. H1 Higher levels of knowledge management (KM) will be positively related to project documentation (PD).
Higher levels of knowledge management, as defined above, include higher levels of expertise, willingness to share and knowledge sharing practices within the project. Theoretically we would expect that these attributes would result in the production of more complete project documents.
Sample and measures
This analysis extends previous work to include a separate consideration of the social and document alignment constructs that were introduced by Reich et al. (2014). The discussion on the sample and measures therefore follows and summarizes the discussion in that article.
Analysis and results
The model was analyzed using partial least squares (PLS) techniques as implemented in SmartPLS version 2.0.M3. Structural equation modeling was chosen over more traditional regression-based techniques in estimating multiple latent variables with multiple indicators (Gefen et al., 2011). The PLS technique was chosen over covariance techniques (such as LISREL) because PLS does not require measurement errors to be uncorrelated. This is an advantage in studies where the measures have not been well
Discussion and implications
This paper investigated whether a project manager should invest time and resources into developing comprehensive, linked planning documents (the Plan-based approach) or into developing shared understanding (the People-based approach) in an IT-enabled business project. This investigation can be broken down into three questions that explore the impact of these two approaches on business value gained from a project
- 1)
Do Plan-based and People-based knowledge management approaches impact project
Conclusion
This study started from the presumption that IT projects are knowledge intensive and that the alignment of knowledge was important in developing project performance. What we found was that both elements of alignment — the alignment of more tacit knowledge (e.g. a focus on people) through socialization and the alignment of explicit information through codification (e.g. a focus on plans) were important determinants of project performance. They are complementary and both should be pursued in
Conflict of interest
Authors have no conflicts, are not employed by any governments or commercial operations.
References (61)
Rethinking Project Management: An Organisational Perspective
(2008)- et al.
An integrative contingency model of software project risk management
J. Manag. Inf. Syst.
(2001) Sharing meaning across occupational communities: the transformation of understanding on a production floor
Organ. Sci.
(2003)- et al.
MIS problems and failures: a socio-technical perspective
MIS Q.
(1977) - et al.
Social practices and the management of knowledge in project environments
Int. J. Proj. Manag.
(2003) - et al.
Organisational learning and communities-of-practice: toward a unified view of working, learning and innovation
Organ. Sci.
(1991) - et al.
Situated cognition and the culture of learning
Educ. Res.
(1989) - et al.
Beyond computation: information technology, organizational and business performance
J. Econ. Perspect.
(2000) Minimizing method bias through programmatic research
MIS Q.
(2009)- et al.
Convergent and discriminant validity by the multitrait–multimethod matrix
Psychol. Bull.
(1959)
IT alignment — what have we learned?
J. Inf. Technol.
Business strategic orientation, information strategic orientation, and strategic alignment
Inf. Syst. Res.
Issues and opinion on structural equation modeling
MIS Q.
How to Write Up and Report PLS Analyses
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences
Incorporating formative measures into covariance-based structural equation models
MIS Q.
Common methods bias: does common methods variance really bias results?
Organ. Res. Methods
Coordinating expertise in software development teams
Manag. Sci.
Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses
Behav. Res. Methods
Re-conceptualizing information system success: the IS-impact measurement model
J. Assoc. Inf. Syst.
Innovation in project-based, service-enhanced firms: the construction of complex products and systems
Res. Policy
Structural equation modeling and regression: guidelines for research practice
Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst.
An update and extension to SEM guidelines for administrative and social science research
MIS Q.
A temporal model of information technology project performance
J. Manag. Inf. Syst.
Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm
Strateg. Manag. J.
Multivariate Data Analysis
What's your strategy for managing knowledge?
Harv. Bus. Rev.
Team cognition: development and evolution in software project teams
J. Manag. Inf. Syst.
How strategy maps frame and organization's objectives
Financ. Exec.
Understanding conceptual schemas: exploring the role of application and IS domain knowledge
Inf. Syst. Res.
Cited by (32)
Measuring project team performance: A review and conceptualization
2022, International Journal of Project ManagementUndesirable framing effects in information systems projects: Analysis of adjective usage in IS project business cases
2022, Information and ManagementToward a model of socializing project team members: An integrative approach
2018, International Journal of Project ManagementCitation Excerpt :Few studies that have explored this issue have found that socialization could potentially influence performance in various project contexts (e.g., open source software projects) (Carillo et al., 2017; Gemino et al., 2015; Steinmacher et al., 2015) and possibly enhance collaboration and cooperation between co-development projects team members (Xu et al., 2017) effectively making project teams more homogenous (Andersen, 2016) and leading to project performance through social alignment (Gemino et al., 2015). The few studies that explored socialization and project success are more or less aligned in suggesting that socialization is a key aspect when considering knowledge dissemination (Fernie et al., 2003) or knowledge alignment (e.g., document vs. people) (Gemino et al., 2015), as socialization directly influences social interactions and thus can help or hinder knowledge sharing. However, two very relevant questions remain unanswered in the project literature.
A multi-industry and cross-country comparison of technology contribution to formal and informal knowledge sharing processes for innovativeness
2023, Knowledge and Process ManagementInformation Technology Project Management Research: A Review of Works by Influential Pioneers
2023, Project Management JournalUsing action research in innovation project management: building legitimacy and organizational learning in an SME during a merger process
2023, International Journal of Managing Projects in Business