Abstract
M.Com. (Business Management)
The study investigates knowledge management maturity within the South African Revenue Service (SARS). The underlying premise is that good practice of knowledge management (KM) and strategic information management (SIM) leads to efficiency, effectiveness, and continuous improvement. It is therefore important to measure the effectiveness of KM using an appropriate KM maturity model (KMMM) and SIM principles. The research strategy was a case study and data were mostly analysed by means of quantitative analysis, except for one section which required qualitative analysis. Research ethic guidelines were strictly observed. The research site and unit of observation were given generic names to protect research participants’ anonymity and ensure that the aim of the study was achieved.
The study aimed to serve as input to a SARS business case for implementation or enhancement of KM structures and processes thereby contributing to future ICT strategy planning. The research design aimed at generalisability and the study has potential value to revenue services institutions (RSI) seeking higher level KM maturity. As a RSI, SARS could use the conceptual KM framework and enterprise KM mapping framework that were developed based on this study’s findings. The aim of data analysis was to identify the levels of KM maturity within the RSI, specifically of the assessment of income tax for both individual and company entities in order to provide guidance on how to improve and contribute to future ICT strategy planning. The study sought to determine how will mapping of the perceived KM maturity levels of the RSI’s individual and company tax payer entities contribute to the next phase of ICT strategy planning.
The study was cross-sectional and assessed the KM capability within RSI by means of a questionnaire targeting specific RSI roles. An existing KMMM was utilised to measure perceptions of managers, auditors, specialists and quality assurers on the value of knowledge, lessons learned, leadership role, and culture as enablers for knowledge sharing. Trust was also an enabler established in the theoretical framework and empirical findings. The KMMM was chosen for its self-assessment character consisting of five levels of maturity conceptually derived from Carnegie Mellon’s Capability Maturity Model. The five levels are: Possible, Encouraged, Enabled/Practiced, Managed, and Continuously Improved. This approach ensured generalisability. Overall, the results are factual and the key finding confirm that the value of KM is generally well conceived. However, barriers exist and levels of consensus generally drop as the levels progress towards the highest KM maturity level, mostly lacking in terms of continuous improvement. The general consensus is that RSI leadership is responsible and accountable for creating an enabling environment by investing in infrastructure as well as implementation of policies, processes, and procedures for KM.