With the advent of the Age of Knowledge Economy, most businesses are gradually realizing that only knowledge can guarantee the long-term competition advantage for any individual business. To strengthen its competitive edge, China Steel Corporation (also known as CSC) has been actively investing in knowledge management in recent years. The purpose of this study, then, is an attempt to find out the factors that may be hindering CSC¡¦s knowledge management and innovation and possible solutions to these issues. This study will first construct a relevant theory to knowledge management and innovation obstruction, followed by a discussion regarding the current situation of CSC¡¦s knowledge innovation and management. Through in-depth interview and questionnaire survey with CSC¡¦s individual departments, the present research is going to try to ascertain the factors in CSC¡¦s knowledge obstruction, to devise a plausible solution relevant to the company¡¦s problems, and to serve as an example for other businesses who may also be mapping their own knowledge management. The primary research subject of this study includes current CSC staff with a rank of certified engineer or above. All subjects are arranged into five main groups according to their departments. A total of 410 questionnaires are issued, but only 244 responses are deemed valid and are included in the research. Through various statistical analyses, like Reliability analysis, descriptive statistical analysis, ANOVA, etc., the present study concludes with the following findings: I.Through literature and interview, the cause and factors of knowledge management and innovation obstruction are discovered to be: A.System: 1. A lack of knowledge inheritance, 2. Insufficient trigger, 3. No professional staff, 4. No operational standard. B.Personnel: 1. Unwilling to share, 2. Insufficient training, 3. Insufficient time, 4. A lack of teamwork, 5. Insufficient understanding. C.Platform: 1. Insufficient data, 2. Insufficient hardware, 3. Time inefficiency, 4. Operation difficulty, 5. Insufficient safety. D.Management: 1. Insufficient understanding, 2. Insufficient willpower, 3. Insufficient support, 4.Insufficient communication. II.This study, through questionnaire survey, has confirmed that the degree in which each factor magnifies the obstruction depends on: A.In structural surface, platform is the most severe component, and personnel is considered to be a less severe component. The time inefficiency, insufficient safety and insufficient data are the three leading factors in the platform component, followed by personnel¡¦s insufficient time and insufficient hardware. B.Unwilling to share, a lack of teamwork, and insufficient understanding are the mildest obstruction factors. III.Most subjects of the survey consider the current progress satisfactory, and they also believe that the personnel component has the most progress among many other factors, followed by the work done in knowledge innovation. The platform receives the lowest progress rating. IV.The relationship between individual difference, progress, and innovation obstruction: A.Staff from different work units experiences significant difference in terms of ¡§innovation progress¡¨, ¡§system obstruction¡¨, ¡§personnel obstruction¡¨, ¡§platform obstruction¡¨, and ¡§management obstruction¡¨, etc. Sales unit people face more hindrance in system, personnel, and management than other units. Operation unit people experience the least obstruction, and they also acquire more ¡§innovation progress¡¨ than the sales unit. B.Staff with different work positions experiences significant difference in terms of ¡§system obstruction¡¨, ¡§personnel obstruction¡¨, and ¡§management obstruction¡¨, etc. Engineers in general face more hindrance than other staff in terms of the three main categories ¡V¡§system obstruction¡¨, ¡§personnel obstruction¡¨, and ¡§management obstruction¡¨. On the other hand, technicians evidently experience less obstruction than other kinds of staff. C.Staff with different educational backgrounds experiences significant difference in terms of ¡§system obstruction¡¨, ¡§personnel obstruction¡¨, ¡§platform obstruction¡¨, and ¡§management obstruction¡¨, etc. As a whole, staff with higher education will experience more obstruction and its accompanying factors. D.Staff with different seniority levels experiences significant difference only in terms of ¡§personnel obstruction¡¨. The result of post-occupational multi-comparison analysis shows that this obstruction does not reach a significant standard.