The Effect of Knowledge Management Processes on project Management

The Effect of Knowledge Management Processes on project Management
47

The Effect of Knowledge Management Processes
on project Management

An Empirical Study on Information Technology Industry in Jordan

Dr. abdel Naser Al-Zayyat – Applied science university Amman-Jordan
naserzayyat@yahoo.com
Dr. Firas Al-Khaldi - The Arab Academy for Banking and Financial Sciences Amman-Jordan
falkhaldi@hotmail.com
Dr. Ibrahem Tadros - Al-balqa applied university Amman-Jordan
tadros12@yahoo.com
Dr. Ghassan al-Edwan Al-Balqa applied university
gadwan2000@yahoo.com



Abstract
With the advent of the Information Age the construct
Knowledge management and project management
of knowledge management came into being and has
are recognized to be of supreme importance to the
given rise to a proliferation of research and
competitive advantage of organizations as well as a
publications in the academic and business realms of
major agent of change in the new era of the
management. (Ruggles, 1998) wrote that 'knowledge
knowledge economy. This study empirically
has become the key economic resource and the
examines the relationship between knowledge
dominant -- and perhaps even the only -- source of
management processes and project management in
comparative advantage'. In this statement two
the context of the information technology industry
concepts -- knowledge as an economic resource and
in Jordan.
knowledge as a source of competitive advantage --
Very frequently projects, mostly information
made
significant
impact
on
the
traditional
technology (IT) projects, fail or are challenged due
management approach and demanded a paradigm
to their incapability to get the right knowledge to
shift. This in turn created an abundance of new
the right people at the right time, and help people
constructs and concepts -- like intellectual capital,
on the project share and put information into
human capital, structural capital, knowledge capital,
action
in
ways,
which
improve
project
customer
capital,
human
intellectual
assets,
performance. Knowledge management may be able
intangible assets, knowledge worker, and competent
to address this. Previous studies have not clearly
employee -- all emphasizing the utilization of a
identified nor demonstrated the relationship
scarce and special kind of human resource Garel G,
between the management of projects and the use of
Giard V, Midler C. (2002)..
knowledge management processes. The purpose of
Organizations realized that knowledge is the key
this research is to identify if a positive relationship
asset for competitiveness and they have to deal with
exists between the two? If a relationship does exist,
this emphasis on knowledge in their business
which knowledge management processes in use by
Bettoni, M. & Schneider, S. (2002). In the
practitioners of project management are significant
knowledge-based economy knowledge is considered
in terms of improving project management, and
a primary factor which leads to competitive
what is their impact? Hundred and fourteen project
advantage. One way of doing this is through the
practitioners (project managers, managers, team
management of knowledge. In other words, it is to
leaders, team members, supervisors, etc) some
deal astutely with knowledge, which has been
affiliated with the Project Management Institute
stressed by Senge (1990), Drucker (1993), Toffler
(PMI), and mostly from organizations in the IT
(1993), Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) and Leonard-
industry both governmental and private had
Barton (1995).
participated in the research to answer these

Many organizations begin their knowledge
questions. A positivistic approach was adapted
management efforts by trying to understand what
using quantitative data. A survey aimed at project
they know and where that knowledge is. Knowledge
practitioners of information technology industry
management literature is often focusing on IT, where
population was conducted in an effort to
knowledge should be codified, systemized and
investigate the knowledge management activities
standardized Davidson and Philip Voss (2002).
and to examine the relationship of knowledge
Hence, many organizations have responded to the
management processes and the improvement of
challenge
of
knowledge
management
by
project management.
implementing IT systems while ignoring the cultural

aspects, which influence how people behave around

knowledge (Davenport & Prusak, 1998). Evidently,
Keywords: 3-4 keywords that highlight the topic in
this leads to the question if knowledge management
the paper
efforts should not be
1. Introduction
IBIMA BUSINESS REVIEW
Volume 3, 2009

---

48
Abdel Naser Al-Zayyat, Firas Al-Khaldi, Ibrahem Tadros, and Ghassan al-Edwan
much more than IT? In this research, the standpoint

will be that knowledge management is more than
To support understanding the relationship
just IT.
between improving the management of projects and

the use of knowledge management processes
According to the Standish Group's paper "Extreme
Alkhaldi, F. M. (2003), it is important that this
CHAOS 2001", only 28 percent of all information
literature review investigate the three (3) following
technology (IT) projects are considered successful;
questions:
23 percent are considered failed; and 49 percent are
1) What has been done so far to improve the
considered challenged (Boucher, et, al, 2001). The
profession of project management?
Standish Group defines the categories of project

success, failure and challenged as follows
2) What is knowledge management all about?

Successful: The project is completed on time and
3) Has been any research or studies to date concerning
on budget, with all features and functions originally
improving the management of projects and the use of
specified.
knowledge management processes?

Challenged: The project is completed and
1. What has been done so far to improve the
operational, but over budget, late, and with fewer
profession of project management?
features and functions than initially specified.
Numerous articles, books, studies, and white papers
Failed: The project is cancelled before completion,
demonstrate the efforts of those in academia,
or never implemented.
government, industry, and professional organizations
(Standish Group, 2001) indicated that the
to improve the profession of project management.
main reasons for project failure include lack
Their quarrel includes but is not limited to improving
of
the management of project scope, cost, risk, human
1- Executive support 2- User involvement
resources,
schedule,
communications,
and
3- Experienced project manager
procurement. In particular, numerous quality
4- Clear business objectives 5- Scope
management initiatives have contributed directly or
control 6- Standard software infrastructure
indirectly to improve project initiation, planning,
7- Baseline requirements 8- Formal
execution, and control. These quality management
methodology 9-Reliable estimates projects
initiatives include:
Project success is achieved by improved risk
management enabled by knowledge management.
• Six Sigma
Risk management is the means by which
uncertainty is systematically managed to increase
• Total Quality Management (TQM)
the likelihood of meeting project objectives
(Verzuh
1999).
The
management
of
this
• Software Engineering Institute (SEI) Capability
uncertainty is dependent upon the "awareness” of
Maturity Model (CMM)
"accessibility" of the knowledge available Colgate,
• International Organization for Standardization
M. (1996).
(ISO) 9000 and 10000 series of

standards and guidelines
2. The Main Subject
Mark W. McElroy (2000) introduced three
• Created by an appropriate diverse group through an
fundamental knowledge processes are: knowledge
open consensus building process; and
production, knowledge validation, knowledge
• Covering commonly accepted knowledge a/or
integration. Related to Mcelroy work, the
practices and dealing with core concepts for the
researcher notice the following , his first process
practice of the project management profession."
knowledge production corresponds to knowledge
The most recently released and most relevant
creation, capture , and sharing because it involves
standard to this study from PMI is the Organizational
creation of new ideas & new insights (creation),
Project Management Maturity Model (OPM3™).
acquisition of knowledge from outside sources
"The purpose of this standard is to provide a way for
(capture) , and interaction between people (sharing)
organizations to understand organizational project
. His second process knowledge validation is a new
management and to measure their organizational
phase in knowledge life cycle because it involves
project
management
maturity
against
a
testing the value of knowledge in practice which
comprehensive and broad-based set of organizational
isn't mentioned before by any researcher in
project management Best Practices" (OPM3™
knowledge life cycle. In his third process
Knowledge Foundation p. xiii). OPM3™ has almost
knowledge
integration,
he
mentioned
that
600 Best Practices (OPM3 M Knowledge Foundation
codification and transfer are happen in this process,
p. xiv). "Organizational project management is the
also it involves implementation of knowledge
application of knowledge, skills, tools, and
throughout the organization, and i.e. knowledge
techniques to organizational and project activities to
integration corresponds to knowledge application at
achieve the aims of the organization through
Nissen, Davidson, and Parikh.
projects" (OPM3™ Knowledge Foundation p. 5).
IBIMA BUSINESS REVIEW
Volume 3, 2009

---

The Effect of Knowledge Management Processes on project Management
49

"Organizational project management maturity is the
wish to determine if there is a significant relationship
degree to which an organization practices this type
between improvements for the management of
of project management" (OPM3"' Knowledge
projects and the use of Knowledge Management
Foundation p. 5). "PMI's vision is that OPM3™
processes. The researcher wish to investigate whether
becomes recognized world-wide as the standard for
knowledge
processes
are
responsible
for
developing and assessing project management
improvement in the management of projects. For the
capabilities within any organization" (PMI, 2002,
purpose of this research a successful project is
PMI Global Assembly Presentation, slide 34).
defined as a project completed on time, within
budget, met business and technical requirements, and
therefore fulfilled the organizational objectives that
define a successful project. A desired outcome is to
2.
What
is
the
history
of
knowledge
identify the importance of knowledge management in
management?
the management of projects among project
In
the
early
1970s
Knowledge
practitioners.
management academic-based research started and

focused on the dispersal of innovation and
Research Questions
information and technology transfer. These efforts
To achieve the goals of this research, the following
donated to the understanding of how knowledge is
questions will be studied:
formed, used, and dispersed within organizations.
1. Is there a direct positive relationship
By the mid-1980s, the importance of knowledge as
a competitive asset became more perceptible;
between improving processes and the
however, there was a concern over how to deal
improvement of knowledge management?
with the large increases in the amount of available
knowledge and increasingly complex products and
2. Is there a direct positive relationship
processes. Computer technology which contributed
so heavily to the accumulation of information
between Knowledge Management activities
started to help address the issue. The 1980s saw the
(5
C’s)
and
Project
Management
development of systems for managing knowledge
that relied on work done in artificial intelligence
improvement?
and expert systems. This resulted in concepts such
If
a
positive
relationship
exists
per
the
as
"knowledge
acquisition,"
"knowledge
aforementioned question, the secondary Purpose of
engineering," and "knowledge-based systems"
the study will be to identify:
(Barclay, R. and Murray, P., 2004). To provide a
technological base for managing knowledge, a
1. Which knowledge management practices
consortium of companies in the United States
throughout the lifecycle of KM (the 5 C's
started the Initiative for Managing Knowledge
Assets in 1989 (Barclay, R. and Murray, P., 2004).
model) used by practitioners of project
Knowledge management organizations such as the
management were significant in terms of
International Knowledge Management Network
(IKMN), which began in Europe, the U.S.-based
improving project management?
Knowledge Management Forum, in addition to
other
knowledge
management-related
groups
2. What is the impact of these knowledge
started to be become established during this
management practices used by practitioners
timeframe too (Barclay, R. and Murray, P., 2004).
on improving the management of projects.


3. How can knowledge management really
Sample reference entries for journal articles [1],
improve project management?
books [2], edited books [3], and the Internet [4] are

In order for knowledge management to
given in the References section.
improve project management, whenever a project is
initiated, content, processes, technology, and most
The major proposition of the
importantly people need to be considered (Kelly, J.,
2003). This literature review explores these things
research
with emphasis on the "awareness " of and

"accessibility " of knowledge, particularly in the
Three major propositions were developed to satisfy
studied project management activities
the objectives of this research. These propositions

were designed to test the autonomous and the shared
Purpose of the study
effect that the knowledge management processes
The purpose of this research is to analyze
have on the seven activities of project management:
the successful broadcasting of knowledge and how

it improves project management. The researcher
IBIMA BUSINESS REVIEW
Volume 3, 2009

---

50
Abdel Naser Al-Zayyat, Firas Al-Khaldi, Ibrahem Tadros, and Ghassan al-Edwan
P1: There is no direct positive relationship between

Unstandardized
Standardized

Coefficients
Coefficients
t
sig.
Collinearity Statistics

B
Std. Error
Beta


Tolerance
VIF
(Constant)
1.535
.490

3.132
002


varc1k
-.100
.115
-.103
-.868
387

2.027
varc2k
.371
.128
.310
2.905
004
.613
1.631
varc3k
.084
.156
.068
.539
591
.435
2.298
varc4k
.436
.128
.380
3.401
001
.562
1.780
varc5k
-.216
.168
-.191
-1.291
199
.321
3.118
increasing Process reusability (PM1), and the use

of Knowledge Management (KM1).
According to table (4), R2 = .495 which

means that KM1 explained 49.5% of variance in
P2: There is no direct positive relationship between
PM2. The F value equals to 6.993 with significant
Artifacts Reusability (PM2), and the use of
equal to .000, therefore we reject the null hypothesis
Knowledge Management (KM1)
and accept the alternative which indicate that there is
P3: There is no direct positive relationship between
an effect of KM1 on PM2.
Scheduling (PM3), and the use of Knowledge
Table (4) also shows that the Durban
Management (KM1)
Watson test equal 2.052 which means that there is no

autocorrelation in dependent variable.

Table 5 depicts which of the independent variable

has a significant effect on PM1.


Hypothesis Testing

First hypothesis:

H0: There is no direct positive relationship
The test shows there is positive relationship
between increasing Process reusability
between C2K and PM2 where Beta equal .310 (t
(PM1), and the use of Knowledge
equal 2.905, Sig equal.004) and C4K and PM2 where
Management (KM1).
Beta equal .380 (t equal 3.401, Sig equal.001)
H1: There is a direct positive relationship
From Collinearity Statistics the VIP values
between increasing Process reusability
are less than 10 so there is no Collinearity between
(PM1), and the use of Knowledge
independent variables which indicate the power of
Management (KM1).
study model.


Multiple Regression Test According to table (2), R2
Third Hypothesis
= .292 which means that KM1 explained 29.2% of
H0: There is no direct positive relationship between
variance in PM1. F value equal 8.911 with
Scheduling (PM3), and the use of Knowledge
significant equal .000, therefore we reject the null
Management (KM1)
hypothesis and accept the alternative which
H1: There is a direct positive relationship between
indicate that there is an effect of KM1 on PM1.
Scheduling (PM3), and the use of Knowledge

Variable R
R
Durbun F
Sig

square Watson
The test shows there is positive relation
PM2
.495 .245
2.421
6.993 .000
between C5K and PM1 where Beta equal -.603 (t
Management (KM1)
equal 4.218, Sig equal.000).

Collinearity Statistics shows that the VIP values are
Table (7) depicts which of the independent variable
less than 10 so there is no Collinearity between
has a significant effect on PM3.
independent variables which indicate the power of

study model.

Second hypothesis:

H0: There is no direct positive relationship between
The test shows there is positive relation between
Artifacts Reusability (PM2), and the use of
C2K and PM3 where Beta equal .463 (t equal 4.758
Knowledge Management (KM1)
Sig equal.000).
H1: There is a direct positive relationship between

Artifacts Reusability (PM2), and the use of

Knowledge Management (KM1)
IBIMA BUSINESS REVIEW
Volume 3, 2009

---

The Effect of Knowledge Management Processes on project Management
51

Conclusion
that, because of using surveys the researcher
Based on the results of the data analysis,
there is reasonable certainty that the population of
is not able to get the respondents to explain
project practitioners surveyed, a perception exists
that there is a positive relationship between the use
their responses, or for a particular response
of knowledge management and the improvement in
to ask the question ‘why’. It is clearly
the management of projects. The primary reason
for this perceived positive relationship may be
indicted in the methodology chapter that it
because knowledge management increases the
was beyond the research power, due to a
likelihood of "awareness” of and ''''accessibility"
of the knowledge available which improves the
number of constraints mentioned in chapter
management of projects as well as the management
of project risk . Risk management is the means by
four, to choose multiple methods of data
which uncertainty is systematically managed to
collection.
increase the likelihood of meeting project
objectives. Knowledge management enables a

project team to reduce doing rework and
References
compresses the time that it takes to plan projects. In

addition, having the "right knowledge" to the "right

person(s)" at the "right time" allows for greater
[1]Alkhaldi, F. M. (2003), “An Integration of
control over the project through out the project's
Information
Technology,
cultureof
lifecycle by reducing uncertainty.
knowledgetransferand
innovative
work
Based on the finding, the knowledge management
environmentin support of organizational knowledge
processes of creation and codification were
creation activities. Unpublished Phd, The University
indicated as being most significant in terms of
of Huddersfield. UK
improving the management of projects.

The knowledge management processes indicated as
[2]Barclay, Rebecca. and Murray, Philip C.(2004),
most effective in improving the management of
"What Is Knowledge Management?" Knowledge
projects was knowledge creation and with
Praxis.
knowledge codification followed by knowledge

capturing with knowledge communication and then
[3]Bettoni, M. & Schneider, S. (2002). The Essence
knowledge capitalization. It may be probably be
of Knowledge Management, A More Appropriate
that theses knowledge management processes were
Understanding of Knowledge. Basel University of
indicated as being most significant in terms of
Applied Sciences. Muttenz, Switzerland.
improving project management because most of the

respondents to the survey came from the IT, ISP
[4] Boucher, Karen D., Conners, Kyle, Johnson, Jim,
industries, and as aforementioned theses industries
and
Robinson,
James,
Collaboration:
(2001)
by there nature strive everyday to get the right
“Development & Management Collaborating on
knowledge to the right people at the right time to
Project
Success."
Software
Magazine,
improve their organizational performance
February/March

Limitations of the study
[5]Colgate, M. (1996). Information technology and
sustainable competitive advantage:
The research was carried out with the

intention of being as accurate as possible but it is
[6] Davidson and Philip Voss (2002) Knowledge
acknowledged that limitations to the findings
Management:
An
Introduction
to
Creating
presented in previous chapters do exist.
Competitive Advantage from Intellectual Capital.
1- The choice of population was limited to
Tandem Press, Auckland New Zealand

two industries, which has a tendency to
[7] Drucker, P. (1993). Post-Capitalist Society. New
limit the generalizability of the findings in
York. Harper Business
Dynamics.
the context of other industries. However,

restricting the research to two industries
[8] Garel G, Giard V, Midler C. (2002). Management
de projet et gestion des ressources humaines.In
may
affect
the
concept
of
the
Encyclopédie de Gestion des Ressources Humaines,
ed. Allouche J, Paris
generalizability of the result.

2- The choice of methodology was limited to
[9] Nonaka, I. & H. Takeuchi (1995): The
knowledge-creating
company.
How
Japanese
one method of data collection (the
companies create the dynamics of innovation. New
York: Oxford University Press.
questionnaire survey). It is acknowledged

IBIMA BUSINESS REVIEW
Volume 3, 2009

---

52
Abdel Naser Al-Zayyat, Firas Al-Khaldi, Ibrahem Tadros, and Ghassan al-Edwan
[10] McElroy, Mark W. (2000). Integrating
complexity theory, knowledge management
and organizational learning. Journal of Knowledge
Management, 4 (3), 195-203.

[11] Nissen, M.E. "Knowledge-Based Knowledge
Management
in
the
Re-engineering
Domain,"Decision Support Systems 27, Special
Issue on Knowledge Management (1999).

[12] Parikh, M. (2001, September). Knowledge
management framework for high-tech research and
development,
Engineering
Management
Journal,13(3), 27–33.


Copyright © 2009 by the International Business
Information Management Association (IBIMA).
All rights reserved. Authors retain copyright for
their manuscripts and provide this journal with a
publication permission agreement as a part of
IBIMA copyright agreement. IBIMA may not
necessarily agree with the content of the
manuscript. The content and proofreading of this
manuscript as well as any errors are the sole
responsibility of its author(s). No part or all of this
work should be copied or reproduced in digital,
hard, or any other format for commercial use
without written permission. To purchase reprints
of this article please e-mail: admin@ibima.org.

IBIMA BUSINESS REVIEW
Volume 3, 2009

---