Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Knowledge ...

Radwan Kharabsheh, Ihab Magableh and Sukina Sawadha
Ho (2009) found that knowledge creation, knowledge internalization on <strong>the</strong> operational side and
knowledge internalization on <strong>the</strong> customer side, all are all positively related to <strong>the</strong> importance <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>
financial performance index. KM creation, can give business opportunities <strong>of</strong> small- and medium-scale
s<strong>of</strong>tware companies (Kumarawadu, 2008). Uhlaner et. al. (2007) emphasized <strong>the</strong> importance <strong>of</strong> both
knowledge absorption and knowledge creation to <strong>the</strong> success <strong>of</strong> innovative efforts in small
companies. In <strong>the</strong> same context, Choi and Lee (2000) stated that organization can achieve strategic,
economic benefits <strong>of</strong> KM from effective KM processes such as <strong>the</strong> creation and sharing. Therefore,
this paper makes <strong>the</strong> following hypo<strong>the</strong>sis:
H3: There is a positive relationship between <strong>the</strong> ability to experiment and create new
knowledge and OP.
Kasim (2008) stated that knowledge acquisition, at <strong>the</strong> organizational level are a prerequisite for
successful OP and seeks to explore <strong>the</strong> role <strong>of</strong> KMPs and competencies in achieving superior
performance among organizations. Therefore, this paper makes <strong>the</strong> following hypo<strong>the</strong>sis:
H4: There is a positive relationship between knowledge capturing and acquisition and
OP.
Kumarawadu (2008) argued that KM education and training can give business opportunities <strong>of</strong> smalland
medium-scale s<strong>of</strong>tware companies (SMSCs) to improve productivity, product quality, flexibility,
inter-employee relationships, effective knowledge creation and knowledge utilization while achieving
<strong>the</strong>ir cost, quality and time targets and thus, SMSCs can gain competitive advantage to sustain <strong>the</strong>ir
business. His study found that organization preparedness, KM education and training and knowledge
creation and transformation play significant roles in enabling KM initiative in <strong>the</strong> organization and will
increase <strong>the</strong> potential <strong>of</strong> gaining competitive advantage for <strong>the</strong> organization. Therefore, this paper
makes <strong>the</strong> following hypo<strong>the</strong>sis:
H5: There is a positive relationship between training and competences development and
OP.
Uhlaner et. al. (2007) found that KM input strategies related to knowledge acquisition are positively
related to sales turnover growth also result showed <strong>the</strong> variations in sales turnover growth from
various measures <strong>of</strong> KM strategies. Similarly, Ho (2009) found that strategy and leadership shows <strong>the</strong>
most significant, positive relationship with <strong>the</strong> KM process performance index among all <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r KM
enablers. A recent study by Yang (2010) found that strategic performance is significantly related to
KM strategy. (Choi et. al., 2008) stated that <strong>the</strong>re is a synergistic effects <strong>of</strong> KM strategies on OP.
Therefore, this paper makes <strong>the</strong> following hypo<strong>the</strong>sis:
H6: There is a positive relationship between policies and strategies <strong>of</strong> knowledge
management and OP.
3. Organizational performance
KM has been linked positively to financial performance measures such as pr<strong>of</strong>itability (Marque´s and
Simo´n, 2006; Choi and Lee, 2003; Choi et. al., 2008 ; Fugate et. al.., 2009), and growth (Marque´s
and Simo´n, 2006), and non financial performance measures such as innovation (Kiessling, 2009;
Lundvall and Nielsen, 2007; Gloet and Terziovski, 2004; Kremp et. al. 2003), competitive advantage
(Massa et. al.. 2009; Kumarawadu, 2008; Gupta, 2002), and stakeholder satisfaction (Marque´s and
Simo´n, 2006). This study adopts <strong>the</strong> measure by Farrell et. al. (2008) who measured OP using <strong>the</strong>
following five dimensions: financial performance, new product success, customer satisfaction,
competitive intensity and market share. Accordingly, <strong>the</strong> study makes <strong>the</strong> following hypo<strong>the</strong>ses:
H7: <strong>the</strong>re is a positive relationship between KMPs and financial performance.
H8: <strong>the</strong>re is a positive relationship between KMPs and new product success.
H9: <strong>the</strong>re is a positive relationship between KMPs and customer satisfaction
H10: <strong>the</strong>re is a positive relationship between KMPs and competitive intensity.
H11: <strong>the</strong>re is a positive relationship between KMPs and market share.
4. Research methodology
There are 16 pharmaceutical companies in Jordan (JAPM, 2011) <strong>of</strong> which 13 companies only agreed
to participate in this study. The study used a self-administered questionnaire survey. A brief
509