This research report captures a detailed exposition of an investigation on Knowledge Management (KM) practices in public and private sector entities in three industries (health, education and business loans) of Limpopo province – a proxy of the rural areas of South Africa. The investigation was necessitated by a need to understand KM in organisational context experiencing constraints in terms of resources that enable KM. It was found through an intensive literature review that there were very few empirical studies on KM practices of organisations operating in the rural areas, particularly in Africa. The theoretical framework of the study emanates from the knowledge-based view which has been popularised by the seminal work of Peter Drucker and Nonaka in the early half of the 90s. The knowledge-based view as presented in chapter 2 recognises the strategic role of knowledge in organisations. Its genesis is traced from the theories of classical scholars such as Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. Various empirical studies of entities which have adopted the knowledge-based view are presented in chapter 2 of this report. The researcher observes from an intensive KM literature study that the average modern organisation could be categorised as knowledge-intensive considering that knowledge workers constitute the majority of its workforce. The definitions of a knowledge-based organisation and knowledge workers are presented in the operational definitions of key concepts. Arising from the identified gaps in KM literature as presented towards the end of chapter 2, this study was conducted as a comparative study between public and private sector entities in three research industries focusing on their extent of ICT application and degree of knowledge-oriented social factors for information and knowledge sharing. The investigation was guided by three research objectives as discussed in chapter 1 of this research report. The main purpose of the study was to answer two fundamental research questions as reflected in chapter 1. In answering the two research questions, the researcher identified four research hypotheses in line with the findings established from KM literature. These hypotheses are discussed in chapter 2 of this report.The underlying hypothesised statement guiding the study was to determine whether there were any significant differences in KM implementation between public and private sector entities in the three research industries in terms of four research constructs. These are: application of ICTs for knowledge and information sharing, degree of achievement of knowledge-based outcomes, tacit knowledge acquisition and the degree of knowledge-oriented social factors. Organisational culture, organisational structures, human resource practices and leadership comprised the social factors tested in the study. The research data were collected through a mixed research design approach combining the advantages of a survey instrument and interviews (this is fully reflected in chapter 3 of this research report). The research results (as presented in chapter 4) pointed to some form of significant differences in KM implementation between public and private sector entities in the education and business loans industry, but there were no significant differences in KM implementation between public and private sector entities in the health industry. Arising from the findings of the study, a model for improved KM implementation is presented in chapter 4 (figure 4.16). It was found during the investigation that all the research entities approached KM implicitly through KM related practices. KM related practices were found to be far more entrenched in the health industry (both public and private sector entities), the private sector entities in the education and business loans industries than was the case with the public sector entities in the education and business loans industries. In the entities where KM related practices were found to be entrenched, there were concerted efforts towards improved organisational processes. The study has managed to unravel the importance of KM related practices in laying the foundation for a formalised KM approach. / Graduate School of Business Leadership / D.B.L.

This research report captures a detailed exposition of an investigation on Knowledge Management (KM) practices in public and private sector entities in three industries (health, education and business loans) of Limpopo province – a proxy of the rural areas of South Africa. The investigation was necessitated by a need to understand KM in organisational context experiencing constraints in terms of resources that enable KM. It was found through an intensive literature review that there were very few empirical studies on KM practices of organisations operating in the rural areas, particularly in Africa. The theoretical framework of the study emanates from the knowledge-based view which has been popularised by the seminal work of Peter Drucker and Nonaka in the early half of the 90s. The knowledge-based view as presented in chapter 2 recognises the strategic role of knowledge in organisations. Its genesis is traced from the theories of classical scholars such as Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. Various empirical studies of entities which have adopted the knowledge-based view are presented in chapter 2 of this report. The researcher observes from an intensive KM literature study that the average modern organisation could be categorised as knowledge-intensive considering that knowledge workers constitute the majority of its workforce. The definitions of a knowledge-based organisation and knowledge workers are presented in the operational definitions of key concepts. Arising from the identified gaps in KM literature as presented towards the end of chapter 2, this study was conducted as a comparative study between public and private sector entities in three research industries focusing on their extent of ICT application and degree of knowledge-oriented social factors for information and knowledge sharing. The investigation was guided by three research objectives as discussed in chapter 1 of this research report. The main purpose of the study was to answer two fundamental research questions as reflected in chapter 1. In answering the two research questions, the researcher identified four research hypotheses in line with the findings established from KM literature. These hypotheses are discussed in chapter 2 of this report.The underlying hypothesised statement guiding the study was to determine whether there were any significant differences in KM implementation between public and private sector entities in the three research industries in terms of four research constructs. These are: application of ICTs for knowledge and information sharing, degree of achievement of knowledge-based outcomes, tacit knowledge acquisition and the degree of knowledge-oriented social factors. Organisational culture, organisational structures, human resource practices and leadership comprised the social factors tested in the study. The research data were collected through a mixed research design approach combining the advantages of a survey instrument and interviews (this is fully reflected in chapter 3 of this research report). The research results (as presented in chapter 4) pointed to some form of significant differences in KM implementation between public and private sector entities in the education and business loans industry, but there were no significant differences in KM implementation between public and private sector entities in the health industry. Arising from the findings of the study, a model for improved KM implementation is presented in chapter 4 (figure 4.16). It was found during the investigation that all the research entities approached KM implicitly through KM related practices. KM related practices were found to be far more entrenched in the health industry (both public and private sector entities), the private sector entities in the education and business loans industries than was the case with the public sector entities in the education and business loans industries. In the entities where KM related practices were found to be entrenched, there were concerted efforts towards improved organisational processes. The study has managed to unravel the importance of KM related practices in laying the foundation for a formalised KM approach. / Graduate School of Business Leadership / D.B.L.

Text in English with abstracts in English, Afrikaans and Venda / In this qualitative study, the research objective was to present a theoretical framework for the phenomenon of interpersonal leadership relations (denoting both the dyadic relationship between two leader/followers and the leadership communication taking place in the dyad) in knowledge-based organisational contexts. It is posited that the interpersonal leader-follower dyad (LFD) may be viewed from a systems theory perspective as a system consisting of two system parts (individuals). These individuals are labelled ‘leader/followers’ to emphasise their mutual interdependence, and to indicate that these roles may be interchangeable, based on the knowledge needs in a particular situation (in line with the tenets of shared leadership). The dyadic system is influenced by its environment, the organisational context. However, the primary focus of this study is on interpersonal leadership communication as symbolic interaction between the leader/followers in the LFD. These three systemic levels are represented as major themes in the model resulting from this study: Theme 1 – an organisational environment that supports constructive interpersonal leadership relations (ILR); Theme 2 – symbolic interaction in the LFD; and Theme 3 – personal attributes that enhance ILR. The data were collected from two convenience samples. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants in Sample 1, while questionnaires were used to collect data from Sample 2. In both cases, thematic analysis was used to analyse and interpret the data. The major contribution of the study is the resulting theoretical framework of ILR, which comprises a theoretically based definition of ILR; a generic model of ILR; and current guidelines for fostering constructive ILR in knowledge-based contexts, with reference to the three systemic levels. The following definition was phrased based on the study: Constructive interpersonal leadership relations (ILR) in a knowledge-based organisational context is a dyadic process of symbolic communication between two expert leader/followers who mutually influence each other and share meaning to strengthen their relationship and to collaboratively transfer and apply knowledge to achieve organisational goals. In terms of the environment, it was found that organisational leaders should actively model and promote the following: a collaborative leadership concept, workplace spirituality, cultural inclusivity, and adaptation to advancing communication technologies. Regarding symbolic interaction in the LFD, the following communication practices were found to be central to constructive ILR: active listening, supporting followers as unique individuals, respectful communication, considering followers’ input, facilitating constructive redefinition of the other leader/follower’s self, role-taking (taking the perspective of the other leader/follower’s role), awareness of attribution, conflict management through non-threatening, respectful and preferably face-to-face discussion, facilitating a sense of meaning or purpose at work for the other leader/follower, and fostering constructive relationship properties such as trust. It was found that ILR may produce system outputs into the organisation that contribute to the organisational culture and climate, job performance, employee morale and engagement, and staff retention. Personal attributes were organised into personal values and competencies that support ILR. The most important personal values were identified as honesty, love or supportiveness, respect, relationships or engagement, trust, and professional excellence. Essential competencies were identified as listening skills, emotional communication competencies (particularly self-awareness, self-reflection and attending to others’ emotions), engagement skills, conflict management skills, and multicultural competency (including generational skills). / In hierdie kwalitatiewe studie word ’n teoretiese raamwerk voorgelê vir die verskynsel ‘interpersoonlike leierskapsverhoudings‘ (verwysende na beide die diadiese verhouding tussen twee leier/volgelinge en die leierskapskommunikasie wat in die diade plaasvind) in kennisgebaseerde organisatoriese kontekste. Die uitgangspunt is dat die interpersoonlike leier-volgeling-diade (LVD) vanuit ‘n sisteemteoretiese perspektief beskou kan word as ‘n sisteem wat uit twee sisteemdele (individue) bestaan. Hierdie individue word ‘leier/volgelinge‘ genoem om hulle wedersydse interafhanklikheid te beklemtoon; en om aan te toon dat hierdie rolle uitruilbaar mag wees, afhangende van die kennisbehoeftes in ’n gegewe situasie (met verwysing na die teorie van gedeelde leierskap). As ’n sisteem word die LVD ook deur die omringende omgewing of organisatoriese konteks beïnvloed. Die primêre fokus van hierdie studie is egter op interpersoonlike leierskapskommunikasie as simboliese interaksie tussen die leier/volgelinge in die LVD. Hierdie drie sistemiese vlakke word in hierdie studie deur die hooftemas in die studie verteenwoordig en ook as sulks in die voortvloeiende model uitgebeeld: Tema 1 – ’n organisatoriese omgewing wat konstruktiewe interpersoonlike leierskapsverhoudings (ILV) ondersteun; Tema 2 – simboliese interaksie in die LVD; en Tema 3 – persoonlike eienskappe wat ILV bevorder. Die teoretiese raamwerk van ILV bestaan uit die volgende: ’n teoreties gefundeerde definisie van ILV; ’n generiese model van ILV; en ’n raamwerk van huidige riglyne vir die kweek van konstruktiewe ILV in kennisgebaseerde kontekste, met verwysing na die drie sistemiese vlakke van omgewing, diade en individuele leier/volgelinge. Die volgende definisie is op grond van die navorsingsresultate geformuleer: Konstruktiewe interpersoonlike leierskapsverhoudings (ILV) in ’n kennisgebaseerde organisatoriese konteks is ’n diadiese proses van simboliese kommunikasie tussen twee kundige leier/volgelinge wat mekaar wedersyds beïnvloed en betekenis deel om hulle verhouding te versterk en kennis samewerkend oor te dra en aan te wend om organisatoriese doelwitte te bereik. In terme van die organisatoriese omgewing is bevind dat organisatoriese leiers, veral senior leiers, die volgende aktief moet modelleer en bevorder in die organisasie: ’n samewerkende leierskapskonsep, spiritualiteit in die werkplek, kulturele insluiting, en aanpassing by vooruitgang in kommunikasietegnologie. Met verwysing na simboliese interaksie in die LVD is die volgende praktyke bevind as sentraal tot konstruktiewe ILV: aktiewe luistergedrag, die ondersteuning van volgelinge as unieke individue, respekvolle kommunikasie, die inagneming van volgelinge se insette, die fasilitering van die konstruktiewe herdefiniëring van die ander leier/volgeling se self, rol-inneming (die inneem van die rolperspektief van die ander leier/volgeling), bewustheid van attribusie, die bestuur van konflik deur nie-bedreigende, respekvolle en – waar moontlik – aangesig-tot-aangesig bespreking, die fasilitering van ’n sin van doel of betekenis by die werk vir die ander leier/volgeling, en die kweek van konstruktiewe verhoudingseienskappe (vertroue, uitruilbare leier/volgeling-rolle en wedersydse invloed is geïdentifiseer as belangrik). Dit is ook bevind dat ILV sisteemuitsette in die organisasie mag genereer wat bydra tot die organisatoriese kultuur en klimaat, werkprestasie, werknemers se moreel en betrokkenheid, en personeelbehoud. Persoonlike eienskappe is verdeel in waardes en vaardighede wat ILV ondersteun. Die belangrikste waardes is geïdentifiseer as eerlikheid, liefde, respek, verhoudings, vertroue, en professionele uitnemendheid. Die volgende vaardighede is geïdentifiseer as noodsaaklik: luistervaardighede, emosionele kommunikasievaardighede (met spesifieke verwysing na selfbewussyn, selfrefleksie en aandag aan ander se emosies), betrekkingsvaardighede, konflikbestuursvaardighede, en multi-kulturele vaardighede (wat generasievaardighede insluit). Die date is ingesamel uit twee gerieflikheidsteekproewe. Indiepte-, semi-gestruktureerde onderhoude is gevoer met Steekproef 1 (kundiges op gebiede verwant aan ILV in kennisgebaseerde kontekste), terwyl vraelyste gebruik is om data te verkry by Steekproef 2 (leier/volgelinge in kennisgebaseerde kontekste). Tematiese ontleding is in beide gevalle gebruik om die data te ontleed en te interpreteer. / Kha iyi ngudo ya u tandula ‘qualitative’, ndivho ya ṱhoḓisio yo vha u ṋetshedza mutheo wa thiyori kha sia ḽa vhushaka ha vhurangaphanḓa vhukati ha vhathu (zwine zwa amba vhushaka ha tshumisano vhukati ha vharangaphanḓa/vhatevheli vhavhili na vhudavhidzani kha vhurangaphanḓa vhune ha khou bvelela nga kha tshumisano yeneyo) kha nyimele ya tshiimiswa yo ḓitikaho nga nḓivho. Zwo sumbedziswa uri tshumisano ya murangaphanḓa-mutevheli vhukati ha vhathu (leader-follower dyad (LFD)) i nga lavheleswa u bva kha sia ḽa sisiṱeme ya thyori sa sisiṱeme ine ya vha na zwipiḓa zwivhili (vhathu). Vhathu avha vha vhidzwa ‘vharangaphanḓa/vhatevheli’ hu u itela u khwaṱhisedza u ḓitika havho nga muṅwe, na u sumbedza uri mishumo iyi i nga imelelana, zwo ḓitika nga ṱhoḓea dza nyimele yeneyo. (zwi tshi tevhedza vhatevheli vha vhurangaphanḓa uvho). Sisiṱeme ya tshumisano i ṱuṱuwedzwa nga nyimele yayo, nyimele ya tshiimiswa. Fhedziha zwa ndeme kha ngudo iyi ndi nga vhudavhidzani ha vhurangaphanḓa vhukati ha vhathu sa tshiga tsha tshumisano vhukati ha vharangaphanḓa/vhatevheli kha LFD. Maga aya mararu a sisisṱeme a imelelwa nga ṱhoho khulwane kha nḓila yo livhisaho kha ngudo iyi: Ṱhoho 1 – mupo/nyimele ya tshiimiswa i ṱuṱuwedzaho vhushaka ha vhurangaphanḓa vhu vhuedzaho vhukati ha vhathu (interpersonal leadership relations (ILR)); Ṱhoho 2 – Tshiga tsha tshumisano kha LFD; na Ṱhoho 3 – Vhuvha ha muthu vhune ha konisa ILR. Data yo kuvhanganywa u bva kha sambula dzine dza vha dza tsinisa. Mbudziso dzo ṱanḓavhuwaho, dzi sa langiho kufhindulele kha vhavhudziswa dzo itwa hu na vhadzheneli kha Sambula ya u thoma (1), ngeno khwesheya dzo shumiswa u kuvhanganya data kha Sambula 2. Kha nyimele dzoṱhe ho shumiswa ṱhaṱhuvho i re na vhushaka na ṱhoho u itela u ṱhaṱhuvha na u ṱalutshedza data. Zwine ngudo iyi ya vhuedza khazwo ndi mvelelo ya mutheo wa thyori wa ILR, ine ya vha na ṱhalutshedzo yo ḓitikaho nga thyori ya ILR, nḓila ya u angaredza ya ILR; na tsumbanḓila dza zwino u itela mbuelo ya ILR kha nyimele yo ḓitikaho nga nḓivho, zwo lavhelesa kha maga a sisiṱeme. Ṱhalutshedzo i tevhelaho yo vhekanywa zwi ḓitika nga ngudo: Vhushaka ha vhurangaphanḓa Vhuvhedzaho vhukati ha vhathu (ILR) kha nyimele ya tshiimiswa yo ḓitikaho nga nḓivho ndi maitele a tshumisano ya tshiga tsha vhudavhidzani vhukati ha vharangaphanḓa/vhatevheli vha re na nḓivho vhane vha ṱuṱuwedzana na u kovhekana zwine zwa amba u itela u khwaṱhisa vhushaka havho khathihi na u fhirisa na u shumisa nḓivho u itela u zwikelela zwipikwa zwa tshiimiswa. Zwi tshi ya nga nyimele, zwo wanala uri vharangaphanḓa vha tshiimiswa vha tea u vhumba na u ṱuṱuwedza zwi tevhelaho: muhumbulo wa tshumisano kha vhurangaphanḓa, zwa tshimuya mushumoni, u katela zwa mvelele, na u ṱanganedza u shumiswa ha thekhinoḽodzhi ya vhudavhidzani. Maelana na tshumisano nga tshiga kha LFD, maitele a vhudavhidzani a tevhelaho a wanala a one a ndeme kha ILR ire na mbuelo: u thetshelesa nga vhuronwane, u tikedza vhatevheli hu na kupfesesele kwa uri vhathu vho fhambana, vhudavhidzani ha ṱhonifho, u dzhiela nṱha mihumbulo ya vhatevheli, u ṱuṱuwedza u ṱhalutshedza nga nḓila yo fhambanaho i vhuedzaho ya vhaṅwe vharangaphanḓa/vhatevheli vha shumaho u ya nga vhone vhaṋe, u dzhia dzhenelela (u vhona nga nḓila ine vhaṅwe vharangaphanḓa/vhatevheli vha vona ngayo), u tangnedza nḓivho, ndaulo ya phambano nga kha nyambedzano i sa shushedziho, ya ṱhonifho, nga maanḓa nga nyambedzano vhathu vho livhana zwifhaṱuwo, u ṱuṱuwedza nḓivho ya ṱhalutshedzo kana ndivho ya mushumo kha vhaṅwe vharangaphanḓa/vhatevheli, u ṱuṱuwedza zwithu zwi fhaṱaho vhushaka vhu vhuedzaho u fana na u fulufhedzana. Zwo tumbulwa uri ILR i bveledza sisiṱeme ya mvelelo u vha tshiimiswa tshine tsha dzhenelela kha mvelele na vhuḓipfi, kushumele kwa mushumo, u ṱuṱuwedzea na u dzhenelela ha vhashumi, nauri vhashumi vha sa ṱuwe. U ṱanganedzea ha muthu zwo vheekanywa zwi tshi ya nga mikhwa ya muthu ene muṋe na vhukoni zwine zwa tikedza ILR. Mikhwa ya muthu ya ndemesa yo topolwa sa u fulufhedzea, lufuno, ṱhonifho kana u dzhenelela, fulufhelo, na vhukoni kha zwa phurofeshinaḽa. Vhukoni ha ndeme ho sumbedzwa sa vhukoni ha u thetshelesa, vhukoni ha vhudavhidzani ha muhumbulo (nga maanḓa u ḓiḓivha, u ḓilingulula/sedzulusa na u dzhiela nzhele vhuḓipfi ha vhaṅwe vhathu), vhukoni ha u dzhenelela, vhukoni ha ndaulo ya phambano, na vhukoni ha u dzhenelela kha mvelele nnzhi (zwi tshi katela vhukoni ha zwa murafho). / Communication Science / D. Litt. et Phil. (Communication)