The effects of knowledge management capabilities on perceived school effectiveness in career and technical education

Purpose This study aims to investigate the impact that knowledge management (KM) capabilities have on school effectiveness in career and technical education (CTE) in Taiwan. Design/methodology/approach The study adopted a survey research. A total of 439 valid samples were obtained and subsequently verified with structural equation modeling. Findings The results indicated that KM capabilities consist of two main dimensions, namely, the KM enabler capabilities and the KM process capabilities. The former includes structures, cultures and information technology support, whereas the latter includes acquisitions, storage, sharing and applications. In terms of the relationships among the dimensions of the model structure, the KM enabler capabilities managed to effectively predict the KM process capabilities, and the KM process capabilities managed to effectively predict the perceived school effectiveness. Research limitations/implications Based on the results, improvement of the KM enabler capabilities and process capabilities of higher education institutions of CTE is recommended so that their school effectiveness may be improved. Because the participants were not randomly selected, the generalizability of the results should be further examined. Practical implications This study encourages practitioners to focus their KM practices on KM enabler capabilities and the KM process capabilities. Originality/value The current study provided an insight into and further understanding of the model regarding the relationships among the KM enabler capabilities, the KM process capabilities and the school effectiveness.

[1]  P. Bentler,et al.  Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis : Conventional criteria versus new alternatives , 1999 .

[2]  Jaap Scheerens,et al.  Measuring Educational Quality by Means of Indicators , 2011 .

[3]  R. Bagozzi,et al.  On the evaluation of structural equation models , 1988 .

[4]  Heeseok Lee,et al.  Knowledge Management Enablers, Processes, and Organizational Performance: An Integrative View and Empirical Examination , 2003, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[5]  L. Kyriakides,et al.  Explaining stability and changes in school effectiveness by looking at changes in the functioning of school factors , 2010 .

[6]  Gustavo Abel Carrillo Guzman,et al.  Packaging and unpackaging knowledge in mass higher education—a knowledge management perspective , 2011 .

[7]  Ronald H. Heck,et al.  Examining relationships among elementary schools' contexts, leadership, instructional practices, and added-year outcomes: a regression discontinuity approach , 2010 .

[8]  M. Mas-Machuca.  The role of Leadership: the challenge of Knowledge Management and Learning in Knowledge-Intensive Organizations , 2014 .

[9]  J. Scheerens.  The use of theory in school effectiveness research revisited , 2013 .

[10]  Evaluating the effectiveness of specialist schools in England , 2006 .

[11]  Jamshed Iqbal,et al.  Leadership Role in Integrating Knowledge Management Enablers , 2013 .

[12]  G. Hutcheson.  The Multivariate Social Scientist: Introductory Statistics Using Generalized Linear Models , 1999 .

[13]  James M. LeBreton,et al.  Answers to 20 Questions About Interrater Reliability and Interrater Agreement , 2008 .

[14]  L. Kyriakides,et al.  Critical analysis of the current approaches to modelling educational effectiveness: The importance of establishing a dynamic model , 2006 .

[15]  Smiti Gandhi,et al.  Knowledge management and reference services , 2004 .

[16]  Yaying Mary Chou Yeh,et al.  The Implementation Of Knowledge Management System In Taiwans Higher Education , 2011 .

[17]  Johnnie N. Daniel,et al.  Sampling Essentials: Practical Guidelines for Making Sampling Choices , 2011 .

[18]  Lisa Petrides,et al.  Knowledge Management for School Leaders: An Ecological Framework for Thinking Schools , 2002, Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education.

[19]  D. Kaplan.  Structural Equation Modeling: Foundations and Extensions , 2000 .

[20]  J. Pearl,et al.  A New Identification Condition for Recursive Models With Correlated Errors , 2002 .

[21]  Valerie E. Lee,et al.  Using Hierarchical Linear Modeling to Study Social Contexts: The Case of School Effects , 2000 .

[22]  Young-Chan Lee,et al.  Capabilities, processes, and performance of knowledge management: A structural approach , 2007 .

[23]  V. Anantatmula.  Linking KM effectiveness attributes to organizational performance , 2007 .

[24]  Fakhrul Anwar Zainol,et al.  Knowledge Management Enablers, Process and Organizational Performance: Evidence from Malaysian Enterprises , 2011 .

[25]  G. Hutcheson.  The Multivariate Social Scientist , 1999 .

[26]  Thomas Wilkin,et al.  Career and Technical Education Teacher Shortage: A Successful Model for Recruitment and Retention , 2011 .

[27]  Earl R. Babbie,et al.  The practice of social research , 1969 .

[28]  I. Nonaka.  A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation , 1994 .

[29]  David Kaplan,et al.  Structural Equation Modeling (2nd ed.): Foundations and Extensions , 2009 .

[30]  Roy Lubit.  Tacit Knowledge and Knowledge Management: The Keys to Sustainable Competitive Advantage , 2001 .

[31]  R. Richey,et al.  Exploring knowledge management to organizational performance outcomes in a transitional economy , 2009 .

[32]  Karma Sherif,et al.  Social capital, knowledge management, and sustained superior performance , 2005, J. Knowl. Manag..

[33]  S. Liao,et al.  The Relationship among Knowledge Management, Organizational Learning, and Organizational Performance , 2009 .

[34]  R. Kline.  Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, 2nd ed. , 2005 .

[35]  Gordon W. Cheung,et al.  Testing Mediation and Suppression Effects of Latent Variables , 2008 .

[36]  James D. McKeen,et al.  Knowledge management and organizational performance: an exploratory analysis , 2009, J. Knowl. Manag..

[37]  Lokman Mohd Tahir,et al.  Creating Knowledge Practices in School: Exploring Teachers Knowledge Creation , 2012 .

[38]  Rosalie J. Hall,et al.  Item Parceling Strategies in SEM: Investigating the Subtle Effects of Unmodeled Secondary Constructs , 1999 .

[39]  Albert H. Segars,et al.  Knowledge Management: An Organizational Capabilities Perspective , 2001, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[40]  D. Hargreaves,et al.  A Capital Theory of School Effectiveness and Improvement , 2001 .

[41]  Dorothy E. Leidner,et al.  Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues , 2001, MIS Q..

[42]  Snunith Shoham,et al.  Knowledge management as a mechanism for technological and organizational change management in Israeli universities , 2009 .

[43]  Roy Lubit.  The keys to sustainable competitive advantage: Tacit knowledge and knowledge management: , 2001 .

[44]  William R. King.  Knowledge Management and Organizational Learning , 2009 .

[45]  E. Sallis,et al.  Knowledge Management in Education: Enhancing Learning & Education , 2001 .

[46]  S. Finney,et al.  Item parceling issues in structural equation modeling , 2001 .

[47]  M. Browne,et al.  Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit , 1992 .

[48]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.