以行動理論及關鍵成功鏈觀點探討知識管理系統

A Study of Knowledge Management System-Activity Theory and Critical Success Chains Perspective

10.29767/ECS.200803.0006

林東正(Tung-Cheng Lin)；紀佳妤(Jia-Yu Ji)

知識管理系統 ； 企業資訊入口網站 ； 行動理論 ； 關鍵成功鏈 ； Knowledge Management System ； Enterprise Information Portal ； Activity Theory ； Critical Success Chains

Electronic Commerce Studies

6卷1期（2008 / 03 / 31）

105 - 123

繁體中文

處於知識爆炸的時代，雖藉由資訊科技協助，已發展出可協助管理知識的系統，惟現有知識管理系統之開發，多以技術面觀點發展，是否能滿足企業各使用者需求，並完成企業賦予之任務，頗值得加以探討。本研究整合關鍵成功鏈與行動理論觀點，探討使用者、倡議者與建構者等不同角色對知識管理系統之功能需求，並以某個案公司所導入的SharePoint Portal系統為例，進行實證與評析。經由關鍵成功鏈觀點分析，為強化競爭力，本研究發現檔案與文件管理、檢索與搜尋及分類等功能，是最為關鍵功能。此外藉由行動理論角色別分析，亦發現「檔案及文件管理」與「檢索與搜尋」，為所有角色所共通的功能需求，倡議者因肩負部門績效責任，對各項功能的需求最高，並對「資料探勘」、「結合資料流程」與「組織協同運作」等功能需求高於其他角色，至於「建構者」則是「專案管理」需求顯著高於其他角色。

During the knowledge bursting era, we had developed the knowledge management system (KMS) with the help of information technologies. However, most of KMS, paid little attention on the role of user and the corporate strategic goals, were base on technology approach. This research combined the critical success chains (CSC) with activity theory approach to develop the KMS's system requirement analysis framework for different roles (sponsor, user and builder). A case study was conducted for M-company which had implemented the SharePoint Portal Server (KMS developed by Microsoft). From the viewpoint of critical success chains, the key functions of KMS were ”files and documents management” and ”retrieval and searching”. Through activity theory's roles view, the command demands of all kind of roles were ”files and documents management” and ”retrieval and searching”. Sponsor who was in charge of performance of department had greatly demand for all kind of functions. Moreover, It had deeply desire for ”data mining”, ”integrate data flow”, and ”collaborative operation”. As for builder, it had extremely demand on ”project management”.

1. Alavi, M.,Leidner, D. E.(2001).Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues.MIS Quarterly,25(1),107-136.
2. Creswell, J.(1998).Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among the Traditions.CA:Sage.
3. Davenport, T. H.,Prusak, L.(1998).Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know.Boston:Harvard Business School Press.
4. Eunni, R. V.,Kasuganti, R. R.,Kos, A. J.(2006).Knowledge Management Processes in International Business Alliances: A Review of Empirical Research, 1990-2003.International Journal of Management,23(1),34-42.
5. Grover, V.,Davenport, T. H.(2001).General Perspectives on Knowledge Management: Fostering a Research Agenda.Journal of Management Information Systems,18(1),5-21.
6. Hamel, J.,Dufour, S.,Fortin, D.(1993).Case Study Methods.CA:Sage.
7. Hasan, H.,Gould, E.(2001).Support for the Sense-making Activity of Managers.Decision Support Systems,31(1),71-86.
8. Jeff, P.,Enterprise. Com(1998).Market Leadership in the Information Age.MA:Perseus Books.
9. Kim, Y. J.,Chaudhury, A.,Rao, H. R.(2002).A Knowledge Management Perspective to Evaluation of Enterprise Information Portals Knowledge.Knowledge and Process Management,9(2),57-71.
10. Murray, G.(1999).The portal is the desktop.Introspect Inc.
11. Muthusamy, S. K.,Palanisamy, P.,MacDonald, J.(2005).Developing Knowledge Management Systems (KMS) for ERP Implementation: A Case Study from Service Sector.Journal of Services Research,Special Issue,66-92.
12. Oliver, F.(2000).Memory Systems in Organizations: An Empirical Investigation of Mechanisms for Knowledge Collection, Storage and Access.Management Studies.
13. Peffers, K.,Gengler, C. E.,Tuunanen, T.(2003).Extending Critical Success Factors Methodology to Facilitate Broadly Participative Information Systems Planning.Journal of Management Information Systems,20(1),51-85.
14. Rahman, B.A.(2004).Knowledge Management Initiatives: Exploratory Study in Malaysia.Journal of American Academy of Business,4(1),330.
15. Shilakes, C. C.,Tylman, J.(1998).Enterprise Information Portals.Merrill Lynch Inc.
16. Yin, R. K.(1994).Case study research: Design and methods.CA:Sage.