Designing and explaining a model for dynamic knowledge management in Iranian government organizations Mixed approach: theme analysis - structural equation modeling)

Subject Areas :

Simin Behjannat ¹ , Adel Salvati ² , mohamad reza jader ansari ³ , Omid Mahdia ⁴

1 - Department of Management, Sanandaj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sanandaj, Iran
2 - Assistant Professor, Department of Management, Sanandaj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sanandaj, Iran
3 - Assistant Professor, Department of Management, Borujard Branch, Islamic Azad University, Borujard, Iran
4 - Assistant Professor, Department of Management and Accounting, University of Zanjan, Zanjan, Iran

Received: 2024-10-22 Accepted : 2025-01-07 Published : 2025-07-16

Keywords: dynamic knowledge management, government organizations, theme analysis,

Abstract :

1. Introduction and Problem Statement
   • Theoretical Context:The transition from traditional public administration to New Public Management (NPM) emphasizes efficiency, client-orientation, and the use of private-sector tools. In this context, Knowledge Management (KM) is recognized as a critical strategic resource.
   • Problem:Iranian government organizations face significant challenges in leveraging KM effectively. The static, traditional KM models are insufficient in today's rapidly changing environment. There is a theoretical and practical gap in understanding and implementing Dynamic Knowledge Management (DKM), which is flexible, responsive to change, and aligned with environmental dynamics.
   • Research Objective:To design and validate a comprehensive model for Dynamic Knowledge Management tailored to the specific context of Iranian government organizations.
   • Core Research Question:"What elements and factors constitute a dynamic knowledge management model in Iranian government organizations?"

2. Theoretical Background

• Dynamic Knowledge Management (DKM):Introduced by Nonaka (1994), DKM aims for superior KM performance by integrating cultural, technological, and organizational factors. It emphasizes knowledge flows, adaptability, and continuous renewal rather than static storage and retrieval.
• Gap in Existing Models:A review of prominent KM models (e.g., Beckman, Nonaka & Takeuchi) shows that while they map KM processes, they largely fail to account for environmental dynamism, technological shifts, and the need for organizational agility that are central to DKM.

3. Research Methodology (Sequential Mixed-Method)

• Overall Design:Applied and exploratory research conducted in two sequential phases.
• Phase 1: Qualitative (Model Design)

• Goal:To identify the core components of DKM in the Iranian public sector.
• Method:Thematic Analysis.
• Participants:11 experts (university professors and senior managers from Zanjan's Industry, Mining & Trade Organization) selected via theoretical sampling until saturation.
• Data Collection:In-depth, unstructured interviews.
• Data Analysis:Using ti software. Analysis resulted in 130 initial concepts, refined to 41 final concepts, 15 sub-themes, and ultimately 5 main themes (axial categories).
  • Phase 2: Quantitative (Model Testing)
• Goal:To test and validate the proposed model on a larger scale.
• Method:Structural Equation Modeling (SEM).
• Population & Sample:Managers and employees of the same organization (N=500). A random sample of 217 individuals was selected (based on Morgan's table).
• Data Collection:A researcher-made questionnaire (45 items on a 5-point Likert scale) based on the qualitative model's five main themes.
• Data Analysis:Using SPSS and LISREL software for reliability, validity, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and path analysis.

4. Key Findings: The DKM Model

The final validated model consists of five main dimensions with 15 sub-components, structured in a causal pathway:

1. Promotional Levers (Motivational Drivers):Foundational catalysts for DKM.

• Senior Management Awareness of DKM's importance.
• Strategic View of DKM.
• Senior Management Commitment to institutionalizing DKM.
• Organizational Culture aligned with DKM.
• Institutionalization of Dynamic Thinking in the KM system.
  2. Intra-Organizational Enablers (Internal Groundwork):Internal preconditions.
• Employee Empowerment in DKM.
• Mandates from the Presidency on administrative transformation.
  3. Extra-Organizational Enablers (External Groundwork):External drivers.
• Technological Changes in the KM domain.
• Stakeholder Expectation Levels.
  4. Executive Levers (Implementation Mechanisms):Core actionable processes.
• Redesigning KM processes for alignment with DKM.
• Providing Technical & Technological Infrastructure for DKM.
• Continuous Environmental Scanning.
  5. Expected Outcomes (Consequences):The results of successful DKM implementation.
• Improved Organizational Productivity.
• Improved Organizational Agility.
• Enhanced Stakeholder Satisfaction.

Structural Relationships & Hypotheses (All Supported):

• H1, H2, H3:Promotional Levers, Intra-Organizational Enablers, and Extra-Organizational Enablers all have a significant positive direct effect on Executive Levers.
• H4:Executive Levers have a significant positive direct effect on all three Expected Outcomes (Productivity, Agility, Stakeholder Satisfaction).

5. Discussion and Conclusion

• The Integrated Model:The study successfully developed and validated an integrated, context-specific model for DKM in Iranian government organizations. The model moves beyond process-focused KM to emphasize the dynamic interplay between motivational factors, internal/external enablers, executable actions, and desired outcomes.
• Path to Success:The model illustrates a clear pathway: DKM starts with leadership awareness and commitment (Promotional Levers), supported by internal capacity building and external pressures (Enablers). These collectively drive the redesign of processes and infrastructure (Executive Levers), which ultimately leads to tangible organizational improvements (Outcomes).
• Key Theoretical Contribution:Addresses the gap in literature by providing a model that explicitly incorporates environmental dynamism and adaptability as central tenets of KM in the public sector.

6. Practical Implications and Recommendations

• For Senior Leadership:Prioritize building awareness, strategic vision, and demonstrable commitment to DKM. Foster a culture that values agility, learning, and responsiveness.
• For HR & Training Units:Develop targeted training programs to empower employees with DKM skills and mindsets.
• For Policymakers (Higher Authorities):Issue clear mandates and supportive policies to incentivize DKM adoption across government agencies.
• For IT Departments:Invest in and continuously update technological infrastructure (software, platforms) that support dynamic knowledge sharing and application.
• For All Units:Institutionalize continuous environmental scanning and process redesign to ensure the KM system remains aligned with changing internal and external demands.

7. Limitations and Future Research

• Limitations:The model was tested in a specific government organization in one Iranian province, which may limit generalizability. The cross-sectional quantitative data limits causal inferences.
• Future Research:

1. Test the model in other types of government organizations (e.g., healthcare, education) and in different cultural contexts.
2. Conduct longitudinal studiesto examine the causal relationships and evolution of DKM over time.
3. Investigate the relative weight and importanceof each sub-component within the main dimensions.
4. Explore the role of specific digital technologies(e.g., AI, big data analytics) as part of the Executive Levers.

References:

1. Rafii Jezi, A. (2013). A dynamic approach to the model and implementation strategies of knowledge management in modern organizations of the 21st century. International Conference on Accounting, Economics and Management, Tehran, Mali, Tehran.
2. Salavati, A. (2010). Application model of knowledge management in Iran's government organizations, challenges and solutions. Industrial Management Quarterly, Faculty of Human Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Sanandaj, 5(12), 107-125. (In Persian).
3. Sanobar, N., Nasiri, H., & Golestani, H. (2014). Investigating the effect of knowledge management capability and dynamic capability on organizational performance. International Congress of Management, Economics and Business Development, Tabriz.
4. Ghobadi, S. (2015). Review and analysis of knowledge management and knowledge-based management in modern government management. First International Conference on New Paradigms of Business and Organizational Intelligence Management, Tehran.
5. Nouri Nesab, M., & Zafari, S. (2019). Modern public administration. International Conference on Management, Humanities, and Behavioral Sciences in Iran and the Islamic World, Karaj.
6. Edvardsson, R. I., & Oskarsson, K. G. (2011). Knowledge management and value creation in service firms. Measuring Business Excellence, 15(4), 7-15.
7. Tubigi, M., & Alshawi, S. (2015). The impact of knowledge management processes on organizational performance: The case of the airline industry. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 28(2), 167-185.
8. Duvivier, F., Peeters, C., & Harzing, A.-W. (2019). Not all international assignments are created equal: HQ-subsidiary knowledge transfers patterns across types of assignments and types of knowledge. Journal of World Business, 54(3), 181-190.
9. Carrion, G. C., Navarro, J. G. C., & Jimenez, D. J. (2012). The effect of absorptive capacity on innovativeness: Context and information systems capability as catalysts. British Journal of Management, 23(1), 110-129.
10. Xue, C. T. S. (2017). A literature review on knowledge management in organizations. Research in Business and Management, 4(1), 30-41.
11. Esmaeilzadeh, M., & Pourserajian, D. (2013). Presenting a conceptual model of applying knowledge management in small and medium-sized businesses with a dynamic approach (Case study: Puish Sanat Raili Company). Improve Management, 7(2), 31-54. (In Persian).
12. Piorkowski, B. A., James, X. G., Evans, R. D., & Martin, N. (2013). A dynamic knowledge management framework for the high value manufacturing industry. International Journal of Production Research, 51(7), 2176-2185.
13. Rezaeyan Fordoei, S., & Ghazi Noori, S. S. (2010). Modeling the role of ethics in knowledge management systems. Journal of Science and Technology Policy, 3(2). (In Persian).
14. Riazetkesh, E. A., Khayatmoghadam, S., & Rezaeifar, H. (2018). Predicting knowledge management through professional ethics. Ethics in Science and Technology, 13(1), 48-55. (In Persian).
15. Hakimi, I. (2019). Investigating the impact of information technology support from knowledge management on business performance, the mediating role of dynamic capabilities. Dynamic Knowledge Strategic Management Quarterly, 2(5), 147-152. (In Persian).
16. Spanellis, A., MacBryde, J., & Dörfler, V. (2021). A dynamic model of knowledge management in innovative technology companies: A case from the energy sector. European Journal of Operational Research, 292(2), 784-797.
17. Sepahvand, R., & Momeni Mofrad, M. (2021). Analysis of the moderating role of openness to changes in the effect of motivation of knowledge management and continuous learning on employees' willingness to knowledge management (Case study: Telecommuting employees of garment export companies in Tehran province). International Business Management, 4(1), 111-127. (In Persian).
18. Golmohammadi, E., & Shahbazi, S. (2019). The effect of knowledge management on the performance of companies: With emphasis on the role of dynamic capabilities and social capital. Standard and Quality Management Quarterly, 9(3), 35-46. (In Persian).
19. Konjkav Monfared, A., Malekpour, L., & Hajighasemi, M. (2019). The role of dynamic capabilities and customer knowledge in the effect of knowledge management capabilities on performance (Research sample: Gas Company of Yazd Province). Strategic Management of Organizational Knowledge, 2(5), 83-118. (In Persian).
20. AlShamsi, O., & Ajmal, M. (2018). Critical factors for knowledge sharing in technology-intensive organizations: Evidence from UAE service sector. Journal of Knowledge Management, 22(2), 384-412.