检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:孙晨曦[1] 郭宝荣 张婷姝 Sun Chenxi;Guo Baorong;Zhang Tingshu(School of Business Administration,Northeastern University,Shenyang 110167,China;Sunwah International Business School,Liaoning University,Shenyang 110136,China)
机构地区:[1]东北大学工商管理学院,辽宁沈阳110167 [2]辽宁大学新华国际商学院,辽宁沈阳110136
出 处:《科技管理研究》2024年第2期81-87,共7页Science and Technology Management Research
基 金:河南省软科学研究计划项目“基于竞优理论的郑洛新国家自主创新示范区优势识别与政策协同研究”(182400410205)。
摘 要:识别及提升知识管理能力是科研机构评价活动的核心任务,但由于不同科研机构之间存在着研究领域和管理体系的差异,跨机构的评价和经验共享存在诸多障碍。现有的知识管理能力评价体系多以科研成果或行政流程为主要指标,存在一些不容忽视的隐患。为此,基于资源基础观和动态能力理论,将知识作为核心管理资源,并将知识资源的相关管理流程作为评价知识管理能力的指标,通过系统文献综述及德尔菲方法梳理出一套包含6个环节、30项要素的全流程知识能力评价指标框架,采用该指标框架对沈阳市12家国家级重点实验室的知识管理能力进行横向评价,根据评价结果给出有针对性的管理及政策建议。研究表明:该指标框架既能从一个更完整、动态的角度了解科研机构的知识管理能力,还能为科研机构之间的横向比较、评估和政策指导提供便利;12家实验室在知识收集、存档、阐述和应用方面表现良好,但在知识的保留、分享、协作、创新以及转化方面存在较大改良空间。为此,应建立全面公正的评估机制,通过定期审计和评估来确保实验室达到预定的知识管理标准。Identifying and enhancing knowledge management capabilities are core tasks in the evaluation activities of research institutions.However,due to differences in research fields and management systems among various research institutions,cross-institutional evaluation and experience sharing have numerous obstacles.Existing knowledge management capability assessment systems primarily focus on research outcomes or administrative processes,with some significant drawbacks.In view of this,drawing on the resource-based view and dynamic capability theory,this paper considers knowledge as a core management resource and employs the relevant management processes of knowledge resources as indicators for assessing knowledge management capabilities.Through a systematic literature review and the Delphi method,a comprehensive knowledge capability evaluation indicator framework comprising six stages and 30 elements is developed,it is applied to conduct a horizontal evaluation of the knowledge management capabilities of 12 national key laboratories in Shenyang City,accompanied by targeted management and policy recommendations.Findings reveal that the proposed indicator framework provides a more complete and dynamic perspective on the knowledge management capabilities of research institutions,it facilitates convenient cross-institutional comparison,assessment,and policy guidance.The 12 laboratories perform well in knowledge collection,archiving,elucidation,and application,however,substantial improvement remains in knowledge retention,sharing,collaboration,innovation,and knowledge transformation.Therefore,it is necessary to establish a comprehensive and impartial evaluation mechanism,ensure laboratories to meet predefined knowledge management standards through regular audits and assessments.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:18.118.104.28