فصلنامه پژوهش و برنامه ریزی در آموزش عالی
توصیف و تحلیل جریان های دانشی در شبکه سازمانی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد رشته مدیریت آموزشی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد
2 استادیار گروه علوم تربیتی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد
3 دانشیار گروه علوم اجتماعی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد
چکیده
هدف اصلی این پژوهش توصیف و تحلیل جریانهای دانشی در شبکه دانش سازمانی دانشگاه بود. برای توصیف ساختار و موقعیت کنشگران در شبکه دانش سازمانی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد از روش تحلیل شبکه اجتماعی استفاده شد. حجم نمونه در این مرحله 147 نفر از کارکنان سه معاونت آموزشی و تحصیلات تکمیلی، پژوهش و فناوری و طرح و برنامه بودند. در این مرحله موقعیت کنشگران بر اساس شاخصهای مرکزیت در شبکه به دست آمد و کنشگران محوری در شبکه شناسایی شدند. در ادامه به منظور بررسی عوامل تسهیل کننده و بازدارنده جریان دانش در این شبکه مصاحبه نیمه ساخت یافته با 14 نفر از کنشگران محوری در شبکه برگزار شد. بر اساس یافته های پژوهش گراف آرایش رابطه ای کنشگران ترسیم شد و موقعیت کنشگران بر اساس شاخصهای مرکزیت در شبکه دانش سازمانی دانشگاه به دست آمد. یافته ها نشان داد که مهم ترین عوامل تسهیل کننده جریان دانش در شبکه دانش سازمانی عبارت اند از: ویژگیهای فردی، توانمند سازی، تعهد مدیریت، فرصت سازی، چرخش شغلی، روابط غیررسمی، کار تیمی، تشویق و ماهیت شغل. همچنین مهم ترین عوامل بازدارنده جریان دانش در شبکه دانش سازمانی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد عبارت اند از: فهم مدیریت دانش، فرهنگ و جوّ سازمانی، ارزیابی عملکرد، مالکیت دانش، دانش به مثابه یک مزیت رقابتی، امنیت شغلی، ضعف ساختاری، رفتار سیاسی، انگیزه و مسائل معیشتی.
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
Description and analysis of organizational knowledge network at Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
نویسندگان [English]
- Zahra Ghafarian Sokhanvar 1
- Rezvan Hosseingholizadeh 2
- Mohsen Noghani Dokht Bahmani 3
1 Master Student in Educational Administration, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Administration, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
3 Associate Professor, Department of Social Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
چکیده [English]
The main purpose of this study was to describe and analyze the organizational knowledge network at Ferdowsi University of Mashhad. A Social Network Analysis was used to describe structure and status of actors. The sample size was 147 individuals employed in “Educational and Graduate”, “Research and Technology” and “Programing and Planning” deputies of Ferdowsi University. At this stage, based on the indicators of centrality in the network, the status of actors was obtained and key actors were identified. In order to investigate the facilitators and inhibitors factors of the knowledge flow, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 14 central actors in the network. Based on the findings of the study, relationship arrangement graph of actors was drawn and actors' status was obtained based on centralization indices in organizational knowledge network of Ferdowsi University. Findings showed that the most important factors facilitating the knowledge flow in organizational knowledge network were: individual characteristics, empowerment, management commitment, opportunity creation, job rotation, informal relationships, teamwork, encouragement and nature of the job. Moreover, the most important factors inhibiting the knowledge flow in organizational knowledge were: understanding the knowledge management, culture and organizational climate, performance measurement, knowledge acquisition, knowledge as a competitive advantage, job security, structural weakness, political behavior, motivation and livelihood issues.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
- Knowledge Management
- Social Capital
- Organizational knowledge network
- Knowledge Flow
- Social Network Analysis
- Ferdowsi University
- Iran
2. Awazu, Y. (2004). Informal network players, knowledge integration, and competitive advantage. Journal of Knowledge Management, (8), 62-70.
3. Battistoni, E., & Colladon, A. (2014). Personality correlates of key roles in informal advice network. Learning and Individual Differences, (34), 63-69.
4. Behrend, F., & Erwee, R. (2007, Nov.). Using social network analysis to map information and knowledge flows in virtual project teams. In ANZIBA Conference, 8 - 10 Nov. 2007, Newcastle, NSW.
5. Braeckman, T., Elen, J., Hellemans, M., & Simons, M. (2004). Models on the relation between research and education at universities: The (national) history and the European (global) present. Leuven, Belgium: University of Leuven, Centrum Voor Fundamentele Pedagogiek; 2004. [citd 2014 Oct 22]. Retrieved from from:https://lirias.kuleuven.be /handle/ 123456789/ 148426.
6. Chan, K., & Liebowitz, J. (2006). The synergy of social network analysis and knowkedge mapping: A case study. Int. J. Management and Decision Making, 7(1).
7. Chatti, M. (2012). Knowledge management: A personal knowledge network perspective. Journal of Knowledge Management, 16(5), 829-844.
8. Chen, W. (2009). Social network analysis supporting collaborative knowledge building. International Workshop on Social Informatics, International Workshop on 2009, 46-51.
9. Cheuck, B. (2006). Using social networking analysis to facilitate knowledge sharing in the British council. International Journal of Knowledge Management, 2(4), 67-76.
10. Cross, R., Laseter, T., Parker, A., & Velasquez, G. (2006). Using social network analysis to improve communities of practice. California Management Review, 49(1).
11. Cross, R., Parker, A., Prusak, L., & Borgatti, S. (2001). Knowing what we know: Supporting knowledge creation and sharing in social networks. Organizational Dynamics, 30(2), 100-120.
12. Dahl, M. S., & Pedersen, C. R. (2004). Knowledge flows through informal contacts in industrial clusters: Myth or reality. Research Policy, (33), 1673-1686.
13. Fesenmaier, J., & Contractor, N. (2001). The evolution of knowledge networks: An example for rural development. Journal of the Community Development Society, 32(1).
14. Henttonen, K., Johanson, J., & Janhonen, M. (2014). Work- team bonding and bridging social networks, team identity and performance effectiveness. Personal Review, (43), 330-349.
15. Hemingway, P., & Berton, N. (2009). What is systematic review?. Evidence Based Medicine.
16. Kim, Y., Hau, Y., Song, S., & Ghim, G. (2014). Trailing organizational knowledge paths through social network lens: Integrating the multiple industry cases. Journal of Knowledge Management.
17. Knoke, D., & Kuklinski, J.H. (1982). Network analysis. Translated by Azimi Hashemi, M., Skafi, M., Mashhad: Jahad Daneshgahi (in Persian).
18. Lehtimäki, L. (2016). Social network analysis for strategically networked organization. The Strategically Networked Organization, 35 - 52.
19. Leslie, D. W., & Fretwell, E. K. (1996). Wise moves in hard times: Creating and managing resilient colleges and universities. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
20. Mei, I., & Lui, H. (2012). Effects of start-up firm's social network on knowledge transfer: An empirical study. International Conference on Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering.
21. Müller-Prothmann, T. (2005). Use and Methods of Social Network Analysis in Knowledge Management, Encyclopedia of Communities of Practice in Information and KnowledgeManagement, edited by Coakes, E. and Clarke, S., Hershey/PA et al.: Idea Group, ISBN:1591405564, pp. 565-574.
22. Müller-Prothmann, T. (2006). Leveraging knowledge communication for innovation. Framework, methods and applications of social network analysis in research and development. Frankfurt A. M. et al.: Peter Lang, ISBN: 0820498890.
23. NG, D., & Law, K. (2015). Impacts of informal networks on innovation performance: Evidence in Shanghai. Chinese Management Studies, 9(1), 56-72.
24. Nirmala, M., & Vemuri, M. (2009). Leveraging informal networks in knowledge management. Journal of Knowledge Management, (13), 146-156.
25. Niyazi, E., & Abunory, E. (2010). The ranking of universities based on the knowledge management and web metrics criteria. Book Quarterly, No. 84.
26. Ogulin, R., Selen, W., & Ashayeri, J. (2012). Determinants of informal coordination in networked supply chains. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 25(4), 328-348.
27. Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management, (16), 145-17.
28. Ramezani, A., & Mirzamohamadi, A. (2013). Social network analysis with training ucinet software. Tehran: Jameshenasan (in Persian).
29. Schröpfer, V., Tah, C., & Kurul, E. (2017). Mapping the knowledge flow in sustainable construction project teams using social network analysis. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management. 24(2), 229-259.
30. Stephenson, K. (1998). Social networks. Retrieved from http://www. drkaren.us/ KS_publications01.htm.
31. Toni, A., & Nonino, F. (2010). The key roles in the informal organization: A network analysis perspective. The Learning Organization. (17), 86-103.
32. Vicedo, J., Mula, J., & Capó, J. (2011). A social network‐based organizational model for improving knowledge management in supply chains. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 16(4), 284-293.
33. Wasserman, S. & Faust, K. (1994). Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications 1st ed., Cambridge University Press.
34. Wellan, C. (2016). Informal social networks within and between organizations: On the properties of interpersonal ties and trust. An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 39(1), 145-158.
35. Wellman, B., & Wortley, S. (1990). Different strokes from different folks: Community ties and social support. The American Journal of Sociology, 96(3), 558-588.
36. Zhang, X., & Jiang, J. (2015). With whom shall I share my knowledge? A recipient perspective of knowledge sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management, 19 (2), 277-295
37. Zhuge, H. (2002). A knowledge flow model for peer-to-peer team knowledge sharing and management. Expert Systems with Applications, 23(1), 23-30.
38. Zu, W., Shao, L., & Huang, Z. (2007). Social network analysis application in tacit knowledge management workshop on intelligent information technology application. IEEE Computer Society.
39. Zupan, N., & Kase, R. (2007). The role of HR actors in knowledge networks. International Journal of Manpower, (28), 243-259.
)