RESEARCH proposal in Library and information studies

AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE IMPACT OF KNOWLEDGE SHARING AMONG SMALL

SCALE FARMERS: A CASE OF MAKENI FARMING BLOCK

BY

LYDIA SONGOLO

Of

Computer number:

SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS

FOR THE DEGREE OF

BACHELOR OF ARTSWITH

LIBRARY AND INFORMATION STUDIESAT

THE UNIVERSITY OF ZAMBIA

Supervisor:

BA LIS Research proposal by Songolo, L-2014

March, 2014

of 29


Table of Contents

CHAPTER ONE..........................................................1

1.1 Introduction...................................................1

1.1.1 Knowledge...................................................2

1.1.2 Knowledge sharing............................................2

1.2 Background information..........................................3

1.3 Statement of Problem............................................5

1.4 Research objectives.............................................5

1.5 Research questions..............................................6

CHAPTER TWO..........................................................8

2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW...............................................8

2.1.1 Knowledge Sharing in Zambia.................................8

2.1.2 Knowledge Sharing outside Zambia............................9

CHAPTER THREE.......................................................13

3.1 METHODOLOGY....................................................13

3.1.1 Description of Study area..................................13

3.1.2 Research design............................................13

3.1.3 Sample Size................................................14

3.1.4 Instruments for data collection............................14

of 29


References.........................................................16

CHAPTER ONE

1.1 Introduction

Knowledge sharing is termed as a key focus area for knowledge

management. The significance of this assertion derives from the fact

that it provides a link between the level of the individual knowledge

workers, where knowledge resides, and the level of the organisation,

where knowledge attains its value (Davenport and Prusak, 1998). While

being identified as an important pillar in knowledge management

efforts, reports also show that, in practice, knowledge sharing proves

to be a signi cant barrier for effective knowledge management. Variousfi

factors have been identi ed as impediments for knowledge sharing,fi

including inadequate organisational structures, sharing unfriendly

organisational cultures, and denominational segregation (Tissen,

Andriessen and Deprez, 1998).

Of critical concern is the issue whether or not small scale farmers are

motivated to share their knowledge with others. Challenges may be

faced when information systems such as intranets, distributed

libraries, document management systems, or groupware applications,

are introduced to support knowledge sharing. The common motivation to

introduce these technologies is that they may empower the individual of 29


knowledge worker by providing the tools to support and boost his or her

knowledge-sharing skills (Tampoe, 1996).

1.1.1 Knowledge

Bechina & Bommen (2006, p.110) cite Davenport (2000) who defines

knowledge as “a fluid mix of framed experience, values, contextual

information and expert insight that provides a framework for

evaluating and incorporating new experiences and information”. It has

often been

said that having knowledge gives one an advantage over those that don’t

have access to knowledge. This is so because a person, who possesses

knowledge, knows about something or someone and therefore is at an

added advantage over those who may not have that knowledge.

Knowledge is the “full utilisation of information and data coupled

with the potential of peoples’ skills, competencies, ideas,

intuitions, commitments and motivations” (Wang et al, 2001, p. 41).

On the other hand, Jain et al (2007, p.23) citing Bircham-Connoly

(2005) define knowledge sharing as the “process of capturing knowledge

or moving knowledge from a source unit to a recipient unit.”

1.1.2 Knowledge sharing According to Yang (2004, p.119) knowledge sharing can be viewed as

“activities through knowledge, i.e. information, expertise and

experiences are exchanged within a discipline, a community or

of 29


organisation”. Therefore the sharing of knowledge can be encouraged

depending on which environment or context one is in. Knowledge sharing

is defined as a deliberate act that makes knowledge reusable by other

people through knowledge transfer (Ismail & Yusuf, 2009). Knowledge

sharing may sometimes consist of “dissemination and making available

what is already known” (Curley & Kivowitz, 2004, p. 46).

On the other hand, Wang et al, (2001, p.127) posits that knowledge

sharing is about communication, insight and understanding”. Although

knowledge sharing is critical to the success of any venture, there may

be challenges that people may encounter when sharing knowledge. Some

of these may have to do with people not trusting both the knowledge to

be shared and also the people with which they are sharing that

knowledge. Other challenges may arise out of structural processes such

as internal policies of the organisation or organisational culture.

Still other knowledge sharing challenges may be as a result of

infrastructure such as inadequate technology; lack of technology -

email or internet. Others may be because the organisation does not have

enough financial resources that they could utilise on knowledge

sharing activities. Sometimes, knowledge sharing may be hindered by

inadequate technical expertise within an organisation that could lay

the foundation upon which knowledge sharing activities may be based.

Likewise, there are also benefits that knowledge sharing can bring

both to organisations and people’s lives. Knowledge sharing is of 29


important in an organisation as it can improve business processes. In

some organisations, there are specific procedures and processes to be

followed when sharing knowledge from one person to the other.

1.2 Background information

In Zambia, agriculture plays a key role in the economy and could be a

major driver of growth and poverty reduction. The sector is

characterized by a dual structure, where a small number of large

commercial farms, concentrated along the railway line, co-exist with

scattered subsistence smallholders and few small commercial farmers

who face severe difficulties accessing input and output markets. It is

estimated that about 40 percent of rural households are engaged solely

in subsistence agriculture. While the agricultural sector has long

been neglected by the government’s urban bias and single-minded

emphasis on maize for food self-sufficiency, the country’s

infrastructure, extension services and agricultural research and

development remain underdeveloped, especially in remote rural areas

(Bonaglia, 2008).

As part of the government disengagement, the Ministry of Agriculture

embarked on public-private partnerships through creation of

agricultural trusts with the mandate to manage public assets on a

commercial basis and provide research, advisory and training services

of 29


(Bonaglia, 2008). However, the 1996-2001 Agricultural Sector

Investment Program (ASIP) designed by GRZ and donors to facilitate the

transition to a market economy in agriculture did not produce the

desire outcome. A series of droughts coupled with an unsupportive and

unpredictable business environment contributed to reducing the

incentives for the private sector to fill the void left by public

intervention (Farrington & Saasa, 2002).

Zambia has tremendous agricultural potential, but between 80 and 90

percent of the country’s farmers’ work is small-scale or subsistence

operations based and most of the farmers are impoverished. However,

farming provides one of the most common livelihoods for the populace,

especially since the decline of the mining and manufacturing

industries. One reason this sector has performed below expectations is

because of weak links between farmers, extension workers and

researchers. Currently, there is one extension worker to

approximately 1000 farmers, and most information is collected in

person from sources and then stored as hard copy; sometimes it is

delivered in a format or language inaccessible to local farmers. The

National Agricultural Information Services (NAIS) is responsible for

transferring knowledge from researchers to extension officers who

work with farmers to ensure the development of a healthy agriculture

sector. Information flows have become slow and ineffective, and the

use of ICTs can significantly improve this, especially in terms of the

of 29


level of efficiency in gathering, processing and disseminating

knowledge. Knowledge sharing is an important tool in the knowledge

society as it empowers people for a better tomorrow (Kaniki, 1989).

The proposed National Agricultural Policy (NAP) 2004-2015 provides

the overall vision and policy framework for the agricultural sector

and assigns a pivotal role to the private sector, which is expected to

engage increasingly in service provision. Knowledge management can

play a pivotal role in enhancing this policy in general and

agricultural productivity and addressing the problem of food

insecurity in particular. If properly managed, it enables appropriate

knowledge and information to reach knowledge intermediaries and

smallholder farmers in a timely manner. Such delivery of knowledge and

information undoubtedly minimizes the risk and uncertainty

smallholder farmers face from production to marketing of their

produce. But, to effectively engage in agricultural knowledge

management, adequate mechanisms are needed for generating,

capturing, and disseminating knowledge and information through the

use of effective processes and institutional arrangements

(Farrington & Saasa, 2002).

Sources of agricultural knowledge include scientific research and

indigenous knowledge. After the creation, sourcing or accumulation of

knowledge, the knowledge has to be disseminated to users to support the

innovation process. Information and communication technology (ICT)

of 29


can play a critical role in facilitating rapid, efficient, and cost

effective knowledge management. According to Kalusopa (2005)

Information and Communication Technology (ICT) application in Zambia

remains low in comparison with several African countries. For

instance, in a number of Sub-Saharan African countries, smallholder

farmers get technology-related advice as well as location-specific

market information on inputs and outputs through ICT kiosks.

Furthermore, mobile telephone service is being used to deliver

agricultural information to users. To speed up technology adoption,

the government of Zambia needs to quickly review and modernize its

public extension service delivery system and particularly the

agricultural extension system and provide an enabling framework for

utilizing advances in information and communication technology to

deliver agricultural extension services. Using available ICTs will

not only improve information and knowledge management for extension

workers and farmers but optimize and rationalize public resources

devoted to agricultural extension services. Illustrative case

studies on how modern ICT systems have been utilized to deliver

effective public extension service in the agricultural sector will be

reviewed and recommendations codified for policy consideration

(Bonaglia, 2008).

1.3 Statement of Problem

of 29


Knowledge sharing is crucial and critical to small scale farmers in

Zambia. This is because the agriculture sector is knowledge driven.

Despite the importance of knowledge sharing in this sector, small

scale farmers in the country in general and in Makeni farming block in

particular do not readily share knowledge. Knowledge sharing has the

potential of improving small scale farmers’ productivity levels; yet

this potential is not fully utilised. In addition, knowledge sharing

patterns among these small scale farmers and the factors that

influence the sharing of knowledge are still unclear. Hence the

intervention by this study is necessary.

1.4 Research objectives

With referenceto MakeniFarming Blockas a study area,thisresearchintendsto

accomplish the following objectives:

1.4.1 To identify the types of ICTs small scale famers use for

sharing knowledge.

1.4.2 To identify sources of agriculture knowledge for small

scale farmers.

1.4.3 To explore knowledge sharing patterns among small scale

farmers.

1.4.4 To establish factors that influence knowledge sharing

among small scale farmers.

of 29


1.5 Research questions

This study will be conducted in order to answer the following research

questions:

1.5.1 What ICTs are used by small scale farmers for sharing

knowledge?

1.5.2 What are the sourcesofagricultureknowledge forsmallscale

farmers?

1.5.3 What are knowledge sharing patterns among small scale

farmers?

1.5.4 What influenceknowledge sharingamong smallscalefarmers?

1.6 Rationale of the study

This study will be conducted in order to add more literature and new

knowledge to the issues regarding knowledge sharing patterns among

small scale farmers. In as much as the information providers have had

challenges and faced various obstacles in reaching out to small scale

farmers in rural areas, more challenges and problems lie ahead in

ensuring that the end-users improve their knowledge sharing skills and of 29


provide the type of feedback that is relevant to policy makers and

further research in agriculture.

Only when the small scale farmers improve their knowledge sharing

patterns will they be able to provide the type of feedback that is

relevant to policy makers, researchers and other interest groups. It

is hoped that the findings of this research will result in designing of

knowledge sharing programs that can make agricultural knowledge from

scientific research and indigenous knowledge more helpful to small

scale farmers.

This knowledge after the creation, sourcing or accumulation, it can

now be disseminated and shared among small scale farmers to support

innovation process in agriculture. Increased knowledge sharing among

small scale farmers will ensure that extension officers and policy

makers are better informed about current and relevant agricultural

issues. The findings of this study will eventually help improve small-

scale farmers’ livelihoods by expediting the flow of critical

knowledge, which should result in greater food and export crop

production, improved food security and higher incomes for farmers.

Whiletheresearchisnotexpectedtogeneraterevenuesitself,knowledge sharing

could significantly alter the way farming and marketing is done,

leading to a more efficient and competitive agro-business environment

of 29


of 29


CHAPTER TWO

2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW

A number of studies have been conducted to investigate knowledge

sharing amongst different professions and organisations based on a

specific subject of interest, occupation, information environment

and geographical location.

Fewer studies have been done concerning knowledge sharing amongst

small scale farmers, though some studies may be related to the

occupation. This literature review therefore draws on knowledge

sharing in different professions and organisational contexts

arranged in geographical manner.

2.1.1 Knowledge Sharing in Zambia Simuchimba and Kanyengo (2012) conducted a study on knowledge sharing.

The purpose of this study was to investigate knowledge sharing amongst

economists in the Bank of Zambia. This study was largely qualitative

and used interviews as the research instrument for data collection.

The study was conducted at the Bank of Zambia head office in Lusaka. For

data analysis, content analysis was used to analyse data collected.

The population of the study included 40 employees from the Economics

department. The study established that although economists used

various sources of knowledge; their main source of knowledge was the

of 29


internet. The study also revealed that economists shared knowledge

through various mechanisms. The economists used both formal

(established bank channels) and informal ways of sharing information

such as through social networking sites like Facebook and LinkedIn.

Daka (2010) conducted a study to examine the existence of knowledge

sharing culture among academicians in higher learning institutions in

Zambia. The study was carried out through a survey of randomly selected

colleges and universities in the country. The study found that

academicians in Zambia engaged in frequent knowledge exchanges among

themselves and preferred doing so in meetings and by way of person-to-

person interaction. Institutional policies and knowledge sharing

initiatives were found to be the major factors influencing knowledge

sharing. On the other hand, lack of motivation and poor infrastructure

were identified as barriers to knowledge sharing.

2.1.2 Knowledge Sharing outside Zambia Ismail & Yusof (2009) conducted a study on demographic factors and

knowledge sharing quality among Malaysian government officers. The

purpose of the study was to find out the differences among government

officers’ knowledge sharing quality in terms of demographic factors. A

survey of 48 respondents using questionnaires as a data collection

method was conducted. The results showed that demographic variables

were not significant predictors to government officers’ knowledge

sharing quality. The demographic variables researched on were gender, of 29


age, education level, position grade, work place and tenure of

services (Ismail & Yusof, 2009).

Another study was conducted on information and knowledge sharing in

emergency response in a case study of off shore oil and gas industry by

Ibrahim (2008). The research was interested in understanding how

employees working on offshore installations share information and

knowledge in responding to an emergency situation and how that

affected the actions to the response. The research employed

interviewing as the primary data collection method. Other methods used

in the research were observation and the review of organisational

documents.

Lam & Laumbermont-Ford (2010) conducted a study on knowledge sharing

in different organisational contexts. The aim of the study was to

develop a motivation-based perspective to explore how organisations

resolve the social dilemma of knowledge sharing. The analysis built on

three-category taxonomy of motivation. The findings of the study were

that extrinsic motivators that align with hedonic motivation also

reinforced the propensity for knowledge sharing. In the different

organisational types, financial extrinsic incentives do not appear to

be relevant on their own, and may “crowd out” other motivators.

Jain, Sandhu & Sidhu (2007) conducted a study on knowledge sharing

among academic staff. This was a case study of some business schools in

of 29


Malaysia. The purpose of the study was to identify the barriers that

exist in sharing knowledge in an academic environment. One of the

objectives of the study was to ascertain the degree with which

knowledge sharing was considered important by the respondents. The

research focused more on the knowledge processing aspect with great

emphasis on knowledge sharing which is a key element in the

implementation of knowledge management.

The data for the research was collected by distributing self

administered questionnaires to academic staff. The findings

indicated that “that academic staff felt very strongly about the

significance of knowledge sharing in an academic environment” (Jain,

Sandhu & Sidhu, 2007, p. 28). In this study the academic faculty mainly

used both print and electronic methods of sharing knowledge such as

websites and newsletters. The respondents further indicated that

there was a lack of knowledge sharing strategies, knowledge

repositories and also a lack of awareness to benefit knowledge sharing

in their organisations (Jain, Sandhu & Sidhu, 2007).

Widen-Wulff & Davenport (2007) conducted an exploratory study on activity

systems, information sharing and the development of organisational

knowledge in two Finnish firms. The aim of the study was twofold: “use

activity theory, to articulate ways in which the information behaviour

of individuals and groups intersects with organisational processes

and contributes to the development of organisational knowledge and of 29


evaluate Activity Theory as an analytic framework for studying

information behaviour in organisations” (Widen-Wulff & Davenport,

2007). The data for the study was collected in a project that explored

information sharing practices in business organisations. Semi-

structured interviews were used to collect data. It was concluded in

the study that within the preview of the two case studies, information

and knowledge appears to work as a duality (Widen-Wulff & Davenport,

2007). This is where a person can ask for information on a topic then

the response given by someone else is told what the person does not

know. The knowledge given to that person may not be part of the

knowledge that he/she already posses. In case two, it was concluded

that knowledge can be given without particularly asking for it, as in

the event of reading expert reports and newsletters. The duality of

organisational knowledge becomes clear in that it is both individual

and collective judgments about how to behave and the outcome of these

judgments is embedded in decisions that support the objects of

activity systems (Widen-Wulff & Davenport, 2007).

Sonnenwald (2006) conducted a study on the “challenges in sharing

information effectively” whose aim was to examine barriers to sharing

knowledge effectively in dynamic group work situations. In order to

achieve the aims and objectives of the study, the researchers used

observation notes and interview transcripts as data collection

methods. The study results were that breakdowns in information sharing

of 29


emerged when differences of implementation of shared symbols were not

recognised. The study recognised the importance of trust in knowledge

sharing. Bechina & Bommen (2006) conducted a study on “Knowledge

Sharing Practices: analysis of a Global Scandinavian Consulting

Company”. The research project intended to analyse the sharing process

integrating both dimensions based on the phenomenology approach.

The study performed qualitative observational research into the

nature of group behaviors. Accordingly, it took an empirical approach

based on observations of the behavior of individuals or groups in their

knowledge sharing and learning processes. A dynamic approach was opted

by updating accounts of observations on multiple levels of

individual/group interactions. The research study was based on long-

term observation of a group with participation in that group.

Observations of the working practices in context fostered the

perception of elements that could have been omitted or simply not even

considered if the study had focused only on outcomes of the interviews

(Bechina & Bommen, 2006). A preliminary analysis of typical working

daily practices already gave an understanding of the potential factors

to consider such as type of the shared knowledge, its

quality/relevance, transfer speed, sender and receiver perspectives

(absorptive capacity), culture, trust, motivation, working

environment (Bechina & Bommen, 2006).

of 29


Yang (2004) conducted a study of job related knowledge sharing that

were two case studies showing the enhancement of organisational

effectiveness, which proceeded through knowledge sharing amongst

employees. The main purpose of the study was to elaborate the content

of knowledge which employees shared in two researched hotels, and to

explore some key approaches which were utilized for sharing knowledge

(Yang, 2004). It also investigated some key factors which inhibited

the effectiveness of the knowledge sharing process. Semi-structured

interviews were conducted in the study.

The research sample consisted of 26 individual interviews with

employees from the top to the front-line levels of management

hierarchy from two international five-star hotels (Yang, 2004). The

evidence showed that first, all interviewees agreed with the

importance and necessity of sharing knowledge. Second, it showed that

the sharing climate seemed to be informal. The implication of the

research findings for senior managers was to reinforce their

understanding that the stronger the knowledge sharing climate an

organisation had, the greater the degree of organisational

effectiveness that it achieved (Yang, 2004).

From the reviewed literature, there seems to exist a knowledge gap in

as far as knowledge sharing among small scale farmers is concerned.

Most studies conducted were done in industrial or IT based

institutions. When it comes to the Zambian context, there is dearth of of 29


studies on knowledge sharing. Only two studies conducted in Zambia

stood out here. Simuchimba and Kanyengo (2012) conducted a study on

knowledge sharing among bankers at the Bank of Zambia. On the other

hand, Daka (2010) examined knowledge sharing culture among

academicians in higher learning institutions in Zambia. Though these

studies are in the field of knowledge sharing and specifically

conducted in Zambia, there are no published studies conducted to

investigate knowledge sharing attitudes among small scale farmers in

Zambia. There is no documentary evidence from the literature reviewed,

and hence an intervention by this study is significant.

CHAPTER THREE

3.1 METHODOLOGY

of 29


3.1.1 Description of Study area Makeni Farming Block is geographically located about 10 kilometres

South of Lusaka. According to the Zambia Central Statistic Crop Yield

Focus report (2008) Makeni Farming Block has an estimated population

of 13, 678 people. Of these more than 49% are women and the remaining

comprising the rest. Over 88% of the population are involved in farming

and earn their livelihood from the same as small scale farmers.

3.1.2 Research design Research will use a non experimental design. This design has been

chosen because it easier and more scientific to work in an uncontrolled

environment. According to Creswell and Plano (2007) a non experimental

design refers to research undertaken in an uncontrolled and natural

setting. The methodology has also been chosen because it is the best

option that will be able to capture social reality, complex and

uncalculated behaviour. It will also enable the respondents to freely

respond as they will be in their own natural setting.

3.1.3 Sample Size The total sample size to be used will be 40. This sample is enough to

provide for generalization of the whole population. The samples will

be randomly selected from among the small-scale farmers. The sample

size will be used because the central limit theorem states that a

sample size equal or more than 30 is good enough and able to provide a

normal distribution of the characteristics of the population under of 29


investigation (Creswell , 2007). This sample size will also be

manageable and cost effective considering the population of Kayuni.

Forty (40) questionnaires would be administered and distributed in the

following way: Thirty (30) to be administered to small scale farmers,

five (5) to extension workers, three (3) to key informants at Ministry

of Agriculture and Livestock Headquarters in Lusaka, and two (2) to

researchers.

3.1.4 Instruments for data collection Data will be collected using self administered questionnaires, which

is a primary source of data collection. The questionnaires will

include both open and closed ended questions allowing the respondents

to give both direct and opinion answers. However, more closed ended

questions would be used due to the desire for quantitative data which

is to be analyzed statistically using a computer. The questionnaires

will be administered by the researcher per house hold involved in

small-scale farming. This is so because the researcher would want to

know the information literacy competence among small-scale farmers in

the knowledge management of small-scale agro- enterprises in the light

of information explosion. In addition to questionnaires, interviews,

planned discussions and observations would also form a small part of

the data collection technique.

Confidentiality and respondents’ privacy will be protected and

respected and the researcher shall be available throughout to ensure of 29


that assistance to respondents is provided when or if needed.

Secondary sources of data collection will also be used and would

include information materials from the National Agriculture

Information Services (NAIS), the Ministry of Agriculture and

Livestock, International Information Systems such as AGRIS and the

Department of Agriculture of the United States. The internet will

widely be used to access these information materials.

3.14 Data processing/Analysis

The data to be collected will be subjected to analysis using the

Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). This package will be

used due to its propensity to quickly analyse large volumes of data

gathered through various methods of research. It makes difficult

analytical tasks easier and prevents one from making mistakes or even

forgetting certain details or items. The package will also be used

because of the ability of its software to easily and automatically

convert data into statistical charts, percentages and mathematical

manipulation that could easily be dealt with using the in-built

functions of the package.

REFERENCES

Bechina, AA. & Bommen, T. 2006. Knowledge sharing practices: analysis

of a global Scandinavian Consulting Company. Electronic Journal

of 29


of Knowledge Management, 4(2), 109 -116. Retrieved from

www.ejkm.com/issue/download.html?idArticle=7

Bonaglia, F. 2008. Sustaining Agricultural Diversification. Business

for Development. OECD the Policy Environment. Final Report

submitted to: Department for International Development (DFID)

Contract DCP/ZAM/019/2002 London and Lusaka.

Curley, K. & Kivowitz . B. 2004. The manager’s pocket guide to knowledge

management . Mumbai : HRDPress .

Creswell, JW. 2007. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approach (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Creswell, JW & Plano Clark, VL. 2007 . Designing and conducting mixed

research methods research . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Daka, K. L. 2010. Investigating the knowledge sharing culture among academicians

in higher

learning institutions in Zambia . [MLIS Disser ta t ion ] . Lusaka:

University of Zam bia.

Davenport, TH & Prusak, L. 2000. Working Knowledge: how Organisations

Manage what Know . Boston MA: HBS Press.

Davenport, TH & Prusak, L.1998, Working Knowledge: how Organisations

Manage what Know . Boston MA: HBS Press.

Farrington, J. & O. Saasa. 2002. Drivers for Change in Zambian

Agriculture.

http://www.odi.org.uk/work/projects/03-food-security-forum/

docs/d4c1.pdf of 29

http://www.odi.org.uk/work/projects/03-food-security-forum/docs/d4c1.pdf

http://www.odi.org.uk/work/projects/03-food-security-forum/docs/d4c1.pdf

http://www.ejkm.com/issue/download.html?idArticle=7


http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/7/11/40534117.pdf

Ibrahim, NH. 2008. Research on information and knowledge sharing in

emergency response: a case study of the offshore oil and gas

industry. Information Research, 13(1), (n.p.). Retrieved from

http://InformationR.net/ir/13-4/wks05.html.

Ismail, B.M. and Yusof, Z.M. (2009). Demographic factors and knowledge

sharing quality

among Malaysian government officers. Communications of the IBIMA , 9,

1-9. Retrieved at

http://www.ibimapublishing.com/journals/CIBIMA/volume9/v9n1.

pdf

Jain, KK., Sandhu, MS & Sidhu, GK. 2007. Knowledge sharing among

academic staff: a case study of business schools in Klang valley,

Malaysia. Journal for the Advancement of Science & Arts (JASA) 2, 23-29.

Retrieved from

http://www.ucsi.edu.my/cervie/ijasa/volume2/pdf/08A.pdf

Kalusopa, T. 2005. "The challenges of utilizing information

communication technologies (ICTs) for the small-scale farmers

in Zambia", Library Hi Tech , Vol. 23 Iss: 3, pp.414 – 424

Kaniki, AM. 1991. “Meeting Information needs of agricultural research

to enhance development in Africa” [Paper presented at the Pan

African Institute for Development East & Southern Africa

(PAIDESA) Seminar on the theme: The Role of unpublished Reports

of 29

http://www.ucsi.edu.my/cervie/ijasa/volume2/pdf/08A.pdf

http://www.ibimapublishing.com/journals/CIBIMA/volume9/v9n1.pdf

http://www.ibimapublishing.com/journals/CIBIMA/volume9/v9n1.pdf

http://InformationR.net/ir/13-4/wks05.html

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/7/11/40534117.pdf


in Information& Documentation held at Kabwe Zambia 8-9 January

1991].

Lam, A. & Laumbermont-Ford, J. (2010). Knowledge sharing in

organisational contexts: a

Motivation-based perspective. Journal of Knowledge Management,

14(1), 51 – 66.

Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives. 2008. Zambia Central Statistical Crop Yield Focus. Lusaka: Government Printers.

Simuchimba and Kanyengo. 2012. Knowledge sharing among bankers at the

Bank of Zambia. PresentedatSCECSAL XXth Conferencehosted by

KLA on 4th-8th June 2012 venue LAICO REGENCY Hotel Nairobi, Kenya

Sonnenwald, D.H. 2006. Challenges in sharing information

effectively: examples from

command and control. Information Research , 11(3), (n.p.). Retrieved

from

http://InformationR.net/ir/11-3/paper251.html.

Tampoe, M. 1996. Motivating knowledge workers—the challenge for the 1990s . In :

Myers, PS. (ed.). Knowledge Management and Organisational Design , Boston,

MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Tissen, R, Andriessen, D & Deprez, F. 1998. Value based Knowledge

Management: Creating the 21st century company: knowledge intensive, people

rich . Amsterdam: Addison-Wesley Longman

of 29

http://InformationR.net/ir/11-3/paper251.html


Wang, K., Hjelmervik, O. & Brembal, B. 2001. Introduction to knowledge

management: an exploratory study using Activity Theory . Information

Research , 12(3), (n.p.). Retrieved from


Yang, JT. 2004. Job-Related Knowledge sharing: a comparative case

study. Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(3),118 –126.

of 29


RESEARCH proposal in Library and information studies

Documents

Transcript of RESEARCH proposal in Library and information studies