Evaluation And Improvement Of ICT System For A Business Case Study

You are required to write a report based on a given case study. In this report, you need to evaluate current systems and processes and propose improvements or development and implementation of new ICT system for the given case study. You are required to demonstrate your analytical and modelling skills to communicate your findings from the case study. Read the given case study and carefully explore the context of business, the strategy, approaches and technological systems discussed in the article. Try to understand the business processes involved and what can be a proposed solution in terms of using ICT system/s. See yourself as a future business analyst and visualize yourself as applying the knowledge and skills developed in this unit of study, if you would have been part of a team working for this project. During your analysis, focus on the following topics that you have to include in your report:

1. Project background, problems in business case and objectives.

2. Organisational strategies and stakeholders

3. Business context and business case

4. Statement of current business processes and problems

5. Proposed new System/s

6. Method of evaluation for the users to follow while using the system (this will follow from the mission and objectives of the project).

The discussion deals with the implementation of a process in a company in order to audit the human capital of a business. It is very vital for an organizations to maintain a competitive position for a longer period of time, for that the human capital or the intellectual capital is regarded strength. In order to verify the skills and knowledge of the various intellectual capital of the business various techniques have been followed by a business As a management process the implementation of the “STOCKS” or Strategic Tools to Capture Critical Knowledge and Skills  as the process of analyzing the human capital and its quality can be utilized. The report deals with the adaptation of such process that would ensure in maintaining the creativity and quality of intellectual resources of a business and its workforces. The stocks are basically are indicators of the intellectual capital that would audit the human resources of the business (Dumay 2016). The whole process is known as the management of Knowledge which should be the primary competency that an organization must develops for intellectual capital management. The mechanism of Knowledge audit can effectively support the organizations in achieving targeted objectives, administr their own knowledge and favoring the intellectual creation capital valuing. The process of knowledge audit must highlight on both the stock nature of knowledge, as it comprises of the intellectual capital of the businesses, and the flow nature of knowledge, as it is related to the knowledge activities of management within the processes of the business (Marchington,   Wilkinson  Donnelly  and Kynighou  2016).

The discussion deals with the implementation of a process in an organization in order to audit the human capital of a business. The mechanism of Knowledge audit can support effectively the organizations in achieving targeted objectives, administrating their own knowledge and favoring the intellectual creation capital valuing (Wang,   Wang  and Liang  2014). The process of knowledge audit must highlight on both the stock nature of knowledge, as it comprises of the intellectual capital of companies, and the flow nature of knowledge, as it relates to the knowledge management activities within the business processes.

The chosen company in the given case study organisation is GPBI, which is one of the top manufacturers of battery in the world. It provides a wide range of battery products to leading battery companies and original equipment manufacturers, as well as consumer retail markets under its own brand name. GPBI has been listed on the main-board of the Singapore Exchange Securities Trading Limited since 1991 and is currently a component stock of the Singapore Regional Index. Its production facilities are located in 5 cities and countries of Asia, supported by marketing and trading offices in 16 countries and cities in Asia, America and Europe. The GPBI Quality Assurance Departments of both Headquarters and the production plants have wide knowledge and expertise on quality related issues. The company of GPBI quality management processes includes a prevention-based and quality improvement-based technique that is named Value Added Quality Management Processes (VAQMP) (Chan, P.C.W. and Lee, W.B., 2011). In order to manage the knowledge among the VAQMP, knowledge audits have been conducted for assessing the knowledge assets. The report wounds critically analyze the implementation of the STOCKS in the company with respect to VAQMP for this specific company.

Project background

This research project selected the GPBI company for identifying the knowledge assets and knowledge follows the VAQMP through STOCKS knowledge audit methodology. In order to analyze the STOCKS approach, face-to-face individual interviews were conducted to collect the audit data (Reiche et al. 2016). The overall process includes building knowledge inventory, filling, data validation, data analysis, identification of the  IC indicators, construction of IC value tree and IC reporting followed by recommendations for a knowledge management strategy of continuous improvement of quality.

In the chosen company of the assessment tools for the most of intellectual capital does not explore deeply into the particular business process and the specific needs for knowledge. The primary issue that was faced during the whole process was time management (Inkinen 2015). In addition to that the face-to face individual interview was one of the most challenging tasks in this project since the interviews required the interviewer to be skilful in asking questions. The STOCKS interviewer needs necessarily to be well trained and familiar with the covered subject matter before the knowledge audit implementation (Sydler,   Haefliger  and Pruksa,   2014). Moreover, the interviewer needed to be minimum bias from personal opinions that may be a challenge for the whole process of interview.

In the chosen company of the assessment tools for the most of intellectual capital does not deeply explore into the specific process of business and the specific needs for knowledge. For this study, Value Added Quality Management Processes (VAQMP were selected for conducting structured knowledge audits with intellectual capital. On the other hand the structured knowledge audit tool, STOCKS, was chosen to compare and contest between the two processes. The STOCKS, refers to “Strategic Tools to Capture Critical Knowledge and Skills”. It is a process-oriented knowledge audit approach for evaluating the „knowledge health? of a company (Hislop,   Bosua  and Helms  2018). Before the individual interviews commencement, participants working in different departments and at different levels were invited to fill in various questionnaires to identify the frequency of use of IT platforms, document flows, knowledge flows and the corresponding knowledge sources, as well as the critical knowledge deployed in each task in the process.

In the analysis of the intellectual audit process, the Stakeholder analysis in the STOCKS knowledge audit methodology was used to describe the processes in the departments that are likely to contribute to explicit and tacit knowledge. According to the knowledge inventories, the knowledge owners can be identified in each key process (Collings,   Wood  and Szamosi   2018). The large stakeholder group may result in a high knowledge throughput. In this case, the major stakeholder groups of all VAQMP key processes were within GPBI, Therefore, the risk of knowledge leakage was less.

The company of GPBI quality management processes includes a prevention-based and quality improvement-based technique that is named Value Added Quality Management Processes (VAQMP). In order to manage the knowledge among the VAQMP, knowledge audits have been conducted for assessing the knowledge assets. In the current discussion it is to be verified that the implementation of the STOCKS or “Strategic Tools to Capture Critical Knowledge and Skills” would be more effective fore analyzing the intellectual capital of the business. So that that there is quality production and better utilization of the human resources (Dumay  and Cai  2015). As a management process the implementation of the “STOCKS” or Strategic Tools to Capture Critical Knowledge and Skills as the process of analyzing the human capital and its quality can be utilized. The report deals with the adaptation of such process that would ensure in maintaining the creativity and quality of intellectual resources of a business and its workforces. The stocks are basically are indicators of the intellectual capital that would audit the human resources of the business. The whole process is known as the Knowledge management which should be the first competency that an organization must develops for intellectual capital management (Utc.edu. 2018). In the current scenario various analysis was done that  includes stakeholders? analysis, identification of critical explicit knowledge and the corresponding knowledge workers, the knowledge fountain of the process, as well as knowledge maps. Based on all the standard findings and the analysis results from STOCKS, an additional comparison on the VAQMP was made to provide deeper understanding the performance of the human capital of the company (Brunswicker  and Vanhaverbeke  2015). As the Intellectual Capital indicators were identified by the utilization of the structured knowledge audit results. These IC indicators from the knowledge flow data can be used to reflect the “healthiness” of the studied KM processes

Objectives and Issues

This selected research project of GPBI Company for identification of the knowledge assets and knowledge follows the VAQMP through STOCKS knowledge audit methodology. As a management processes the implementation of the “STOCKS” or Strategic Tools to Capture Critical Knowledge and Skills as the process of analyzing the human capital and its quality can be utilized. The report deals with the adaptation of such process that would ensure in maintaining the creativity and quality of intellectual resources of a business and its workforces (Kianto,   Ritala,  Spender  and Vanhala  2014). Few assumptions that may not reflect the total situation in a company. The studies described in this paper regarding the intellectual capital reporting were only highlighted on key processes of VAQMP but not the total  business processes of the company. With the huge amount of data from the STOCKS knowledge audit, rather than using a lot of manual time of data entry, the project team used supplementary software, “Auto STOCKS” from the Hong Kong Polytechnic University, to consolidate the audit data systematically (Brewster  and Hegewisch  2017). The knowledge auditors are required to be well trained and several practiced in the trial tests before conducting the process of formal audit. The company needs to train-up many knowledge auditors before extending such research to the whole enterprise.

In order to verify the skills and knowledge of the various intellectual capital of the business various techniques have been followed by a business As a management process the implementation of the “STOCKS” or Strategic Tools to Capture Critical Knowledge and Skills  as the process of analyzing the human capital and its quality can be utilized (Pauleen,   and Gorman  2016). The report deals with the adaptation of such process that would ensure in maintaining the creativity and quality of intellectual resources of a business and its workforces. The stocks are basically are indicators of the intellectual capital that would audit the human resources of the business (Omotayo 2015). In the current discussion it is to be verified that the implementation of the STOCKS or “Strategic Tools to Capture Critical Knowledge and Skills” would be more effective for analyzing the intellectual capital of the business. However, the company of GPBI quality management processes includes a prevention-based and quality improvement-based technique that is named Value Added Quality Management Processes (VAQMP). The comparison is to be made between the two.

In the discussion, the Human Capital” is termed as assets that are human centered, employee competence, the Structural Capital is termed as internal structure, infrastructure assets and the Relational Capital is termed as market assets, customer capital and external structure. The company is defines the Human Capital as the combined knowledge, skill, innovativeness and ability of individual employees to complete the business process task. Human capital also includes value, culture and philosophy of an organization, but it cannot be owned by the organization (Becerra-Fernandez and Sabherwal 2014). The Structural Capital  as in the case is defined as the hardware, software, database, organizational structure, patents, trademarks and other organizational capabilities that support the productivity of employees. Differing from human capital, structural capital can be owned by the organization. Lastly the Relational Capital refers to the knowledge in the relationships with any stakeholder that affects the company. It is used to represents the external structure and includes relationships with suppliers, customers, and other stakeholders, and the significance of the external environment. It encompasses brand names, trademarks and image of the organization. This research project selected the GPBI company for identifying the knowledge assets and knowledge flows of the VAQMP through STOCKS knowledge audit methodology (Armstrong and Taylor 2014). In order to analyze the STOCKS approach, face-to-face individual interviews were conducted to collect the audit data. The overall process includes building knowledge inventory, filling, data validation, data analysis, identification of the IC indicators, construction of IC value tree and IC reporting followed by recommendations for a knowledge management strategy of continuous quality improvement.

Organizational strategies and stakeholders

Conclusion

The discussion deals with the implementation of a process in an organization in order to audit the human capital of a business. The mechanism of Knowledge audit can effectively support the organizations in achieving targeted objectives, managing their own knowledge and favoring the intellectual creation capital valuing. In the current discussion it is to be verified that the implementation of the STOCKS or “Strategic Tools to Capture Critical Knowledge and Skills” would be more effective for analyzing the intellectual capital of the business. However, the company of GPBI quality management processes includes a prevention-based and quality improvement-based technique that is named Value Added Quality Management Processes (VAQMP).It can be said from the above analysis the implementation of the STOCKS is more effective in  conducting an  audit human capital the chosen business and its quality. The whole process is known as the Knowledge management which should be the first competency that an organization must develops for intellectual capital management. The mechanism of Knowledge audit can effectively support the organizations in achieving targeted objectives, managing their own knowledge and favoring the intellectual creation capital valuing.

References

Armstrong, M. and Taylor, S., 2014. Armstrong's handbook of human resource management practice. Kogan Page Publishers.

Becerra-Fernandez, I. and Sabherwal, R., 2014. Knowledge management: Systems and processes. Routledge.

Brewster, C. and Hegewisch, A. eds., 2017. Policy and practice in European human resource management: The Price Waterhouse Cranfield survey. Taylor & Francis.

Brunswicker, S. and Vanhaverbeke, W., 2015. Open innovation in small and medium?sized enterprises (SMEs): External knowledge sourcing strategies and internal organizational facilitators. Journal of Small Business Management, 53(4), pp.1241-1263.

Chan, P.C.W. and Lee, W.B., 2011. Knowledge audit with intellectual capital in the quality management process: An empirical study in an electronics company. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 9(2), p.98.

Collings, D.G., Wood, G.T. and Szamosi, L.T., 2018. Human resource management: A critical approach. In Human Resource Management (pp. 1-23). Routledge.

Dumay, J. and Cai, L., 2015. Using content analysis as a research methodology for investigating intellectual capital disclosure: a critique. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 16(1), pp.121-155.

Dumay, J., 2016. A critical reflection on the future of intellectual capital: from reporting to disclosure. Journal of Intellectual capital, 17(1), pp.168-184.

Hislop, D., Bosua, R. and Helms, R., 2018. Knowledge management in organizations: A critical introduction. Oxford University Press.

Inkinen, H., 2015. Review of empirical research on intellectual capital and firm performance. Journal of Intellectual capital, 16(3), pp.518-565.

Kianto, A., Ritala, P., Spender, J.C. and Vanhala, M., 2014. The interaction of intellectual capital assets and knowledge management practices in organizational value creation. Journal of Intellectual capital, 15(3), pp.362-375.

Marchington, M., Wilkinson, A., Donnelly, R. and Kynighou, A., 2016. Human resource management at work. Kogan Page Publishers.

Omotayo, F.O., 2015. Knowledge Management as an important tool in Organisational Management: A Review of Literature.

Pauleen, D.J. and Gorman, G.E., 2016. The nature and value of personal knowledge management. In Personal Knowledge Management (pp. 23-38). Routledge.

Reiche, B.S., Stahl, G.K., Mendenhall, M.E. and Oddou, G.R. eds., 2016. Readings and cases in international human resource management. Taylor & Francis.

Sydler, R., Haefliger, S. and Pruksa, R., 2014. Measuring intellectual capital with financial figures: Can we predict firm profitability?. European Management Journal, 32(2), pp.244-259.

Utc.edu. 2018. Mark Mendenhall. [online] Available at: https://www.utc.edu/college-business/profiles/management/jkh123.php [Accessed 29 Sep. 2018].

Wang, Z., Wang, N. and Liang, H., 2014. Knowledge sharing, intellectual capital and firm performance. Management decision, 52(2), pp.230-258.