KNOWLEDGE-SHARING DETERRENTS AFTER CPD ACTMTIES AMONG MALAYSIAN CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT PROFESSIONALS

Mohd Hisham Ariffin Faculty of Architecture, Planning and Surveying

Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, Malaysia

E-mail: mhisham238@salam.uitm.edu.m, hishamariffin@yahco.com

Noriah Othman Faculty of Architecture, Planning and Surveying

Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, Malaysia

e-mail: noriaho@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT

This paper reports the findings of a follow-up survey that among others aims to identi3 the strength of and categories factors) of deterrents to the sharing of the professionals' knowledge gained @om Continuing Profesional Development activities with non-participants in their consultant firms. Licensed and principal professionals from Malaysian consultant firms from various professions listed in the Persatuan Arkitek Malaysia Directory 2007/2008 were surveyed by mail on CPD and resulted in 308 respondents. Of these respondents, 225 provided follow-up contact addresses to receive surnmarizedfindings. The 225 respondents were surveyed3rther by mail for the findings of this paper. Of the 63 questionnaires returned, only 55 were suitable for analysis.

The top three deterrents (mean scores) are disinterest by others, task irrelevance, andfirm S work direction irrelevance. Factor analysis of the deterrents generated two categories ifactors) of deterrents to the sharing of the professionals' CPD knowledge with subordinates and peers in their consultantfirms which are Inadequacies and Irrelevance. These findings will help Malaysian construction consultant firms to determine ways to overcome these deterrents and thus enable them to mmimize benefils of CPD participation to the firm in general.

Keyworak: Deterrents, Continuing Professional Development, Malaysia, professionals, construction industry

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The easy access to knowledge and globalisation of the trade in goods and services has impacted upon the professional occupations. Members of these occupations have long monopolised practice in their field of expertise. Their accountability to their clients are explained away in an ethos of professionalism. However, the era of accountability and quality assurance had slowly but surely eroded the comfort zone of the profesional. The client is now more knowledgeable, more demanding and more desiring of value for money from the providers of profesional services. Professionals such as doctors are facing the erosion of their occupational autonomy in an era of increasing accountability and audit of performance (Rosenthal, 2002; Misztal, 2002 ). According to Dent and Whitehead (2002, p3), "there is no longer a 'true professional', for that identity configuration is increasingly subsumed now under the dominant culture of a globalised managerialism, where customer oriented values and expectations and expectations come to displace

the privileged knowledge of the old elite. Consequently the profesional must find new privileged knowledges and practices, that is if they are to retain or acquire some degree of status and associated protection". This is evidenced by many profesional associations encouraging their members to upgrade profesional knowledge through engaging in Continuing Professional Development (CPD). Furthermore, many governments have set relicensing regulations that include the professionals having to show proof of continuing development of their expertise in step with developments in their fields.

Proof of participation in CPD activities is now part of the requirements for the relicencing of construction professionals (architects, quantity surveyors, landscape architects, engineers and general surveyors) with their relevant Registration Boards (e.g. Board of Engineers, Board of Architects) in many countries including Malaysia (Ariffin, 2005). The regulations are intended to keep Malaysian consultants continuously up-to-date and relevant to the needs of the construction industry both local and overseas.

Yet, profesional practice is is a team effort. A licenced profesional is either an ownerlmanager of a consultant firm or a manager employed by an organization. He either leads or is part of a team who consists of profesional peers and lesser qualified subordinates. The licenced professional who participates in CPD may have gained new knowledge and insights but those non participants who are mostly his subordinates or peers do not. If there is no or little transfer of that knowledge or insight to others in the organization, CPD participation would have very limited effect on the practice. Surely these professionals are aware of the collective nature of their practice and the benefits of sharing the knowledge. Yet, anecdotal evidence indicate such transfer of knowledge is not widespread. Thus, this study is on the detterents to sharing of the Iicenced profesional's CPD- sourced knowledge with his peers and subordinates in his organization.

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) listed four kinds of knowledge: know-what, know-why, how-how and know-who. Information is basically how-what and know-why components of knowledge. The know-how refers to skills gained primarily through practical experience. The know-who develops from the forming of special social relationships that enable one to have accessibility to the services of necessary experts (OECD, 1996).

According to Schon (1987), the application of knowledge by the professional involves the application of two opposing forms of knowledge. The first type of knowledge is rigorous professional knowledge based upon technical rationality, i.e. research-based and scientific know- what and how-why. This is also known as explicit knowledge. Know-what and know-why can be expressed and written down. The second type is the knowledge that comes fiom problem setting and non-rigorous inquiry i.e. know-how and know-who from experiential learning. The know-how and know-who are both explicit and tacit Some can be explained either verbally or written i.e. explicit while others are difficult to articulate to others i.e. tacit. A significant amount of knowledge especially tacit knowledge within a consultant firm is embedded in it individual members. A consultant firm offers services that are knowledge intensive. To optimize the performance, a consultant firm should facilitate intra-firm knowledge transfer and sharing. Knowledge transfer in organizations is the process through which one unit (e.g., group, department, or division) is affected by the experience of another (Argote and Ingram, 2000). Learning is a cognitive activity. However, the cognitive learning process of an individual is done within the context of situated or social practices (Sense, 2007). In addition, knowledge, especially that with rich tacit dimensions, is informally transferred through socialization of and internalization by the learner (Swap, Leonard, Shield and Abrams, 2001). New understandings of professional practice is also obtained through 'CPD-on-the-run' where the learner has to make instant decisions

Interniitiotlul Syirlposiun~ in Develoftiig Econo11tic.s: Cornnronfrlitif!~ Anntong Diversities

in work situations (Gold, Thorpe, Woodall and Sandler-Smith,2007). These work situations may involve the transferred knowledge and thus new understandings of the knowledge may also arise.

3.0 METHODOLOGY

In an earlier survey, licensed and principal professionals fiom Malaysian consultant firms from various professions listed in the Persatuan Arkitek Malaysia Directory 200712008 were polled by mail on CPD and resulted in 308 respondents. One of the fmdings of that survey indicated that the respondents participated for work-place and professional group reasons. It may be argued that the reasons may reflect a desired sharing of the knowledge gained from the CPD activity with colleagues and subordinates at the workplace. If so, are there any perceived deterrents to this sharing of knowledge with these people? Hence a follow-up survey was needed.

Of these 308 respondents, 225 provided follow-up contact addresses to receive summarized findings. The 225 respondents were surveyed further by mail for the findings of this paper. As such this is a purposive albeit convenience sample. Of the 63 questionnaires returned, only 55 were suitable for analysis. This paper reports this follow-up survey to the earlier survey. The follow-p study among others aimed to identify the categories (factors) of deterrents to the sharing of the professionals' knowledge gained from Continuing Professional Development activities with non- participants in their consultant firms. The questionnaire for the follow-up survey contained two scales and demographic questions. One of them was the Deterrents to Knowledge Transfer Scale (DKTS). It was self developed and validated through informal interviews with a convenience sample of six professionals who represented the professions to be surveyed. The literature review was also used to identify possible learning methods of professionals. A draft list of statements relating to deterrents to knowledge transfer was made and the intemiewees were again approached for comments, thereof refinements were made to the DKTS. Although the DKTS was not pre-tested through a pilot survey, the value of the Cronbach Alpha (0.764) for the DKTS from the actual survey provided grounds for internal consistency.

Descriptive statistics provide for the hierarchy of the items from the DKTS. Factor analysis used upon the DKTS items was Principal Component Analysis with Varimax rotation and Kaiser Normalization.

4.0 FINDINGS

The number of respondents to the survey is 71 persons (24.3%) of 292 persons surveyed. However, only 55 returned questionnaires (18.8%) were used for the statistical analysis because 13 respondents sent in their replies after the deadline and 5 respondents did not properly complete their questionnaires.

The following are the demographic profiles of the respondents of the follow-up survey. There were 24 architects, 11 surveyors, 9 engineers, 2 other designers, 7 other professionals. Two (2) did not disclose their profession. Ten (10) had PhD or Masters qualifications beyond the initial professional qualifications. There were 48 males and 7 females. There were 31 Malays, 21 Chinese and 3 from other races. Forty nine (49) were principals, 2 were associates and 4 were employees. Thirty three (33) worked in the Klang Valley (Selangor and Kuala Lumpw Federal Territory)

Table 1 shows the hierarchy of the deterrents to sharing of knowledge sourced from CPD activities by the respondents with their subordinates or peers in their firms. Three deterrents score more than 3.5 on a scale of 7. These were the deterrents bbO1, bb02 and bb03. The deterrent bbO1 is

Table 1: Deterrents to Knowledge Sharing (alpha=0.764)

Knowledge Sharing Deterrents

bbOlMy subordinatnslcolleagues rue not interested

bb02 The knowledge is not relevant to what my subordinates/collesgues are presently doing

bb03 The knowledge is not ielevant to the work direction at my workplace

bb05 It is too time consuming to share the howledge with my subordinates/colleagues

bb09 The knowledge is too insignificant to share

bb07 There are insufficient facilities for the subordinates/colleagues to share knowledge by emsil

Mean

3.981

3.964

3.691

Std. Deviation

1.631

1.654

Table 2: Factor Analysis Results for Deterrents to Knowledge Sharing

Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization. Rotation converged in 7 iterations.

related to attitudes of the peers/subordimates while bb02 and bb03 are related to the irrelevance of the knowledge as perceived by the CPD participant.

The CPD Knowledge Transfer Deterrent Scale has a Cronbach Alpha of 0.764. Table 2 shows the factor analysis findings for the deterrents to the sharing of CPD sourced knowledge by the respondents with their subordinates or peers in their h s . The factors generated are Inadequacies (alpha = 0.783) and Irrelevance (alpha= 0.683). The knowledge transfer deterrents that loaded on hadequacies factor bb06, bb07, bb08, bb04 and bb05. This factor refers to CPD knowledge transfer deterrents that are related to CPD participant's perceived personal and institutional weaknesses that deter him from trying to share his CPD sourced knowledge to his peers or subordinates.

3,073

2.964

2.909

1.721

Interncrtio~lul S~rrl).~osiun? fn Uevrlopit~g Econoniie.~: Cornrnoncrlities,4rr1ong Diversities

5.0 DISCUSSION

As this is a purposive sample, the findings have limited generalisability. However the findings provide an insight of the hindrances to knowledge transfer as perceived by the cohorts. The Inadequacies deterrent factor suggests that professionals should possess competencies for effective knowledge t r d r to the others in his company. Such competencies should not only include the traditional ability of teacher-centred knowledge transfer but also that of guiding learner-centred learning activities that include Schon's (1983) reflection in action and reflection on action, and the learner building up and learning to use his tacit knowledge which Benner (1984) deemed as necessary to build up expertise. Mentoring is an approach where a senior professional with superior tacit knowledge guides, advises, discusses and inform junior professionals and subordinates in their practice. This is considered a popular form of tacit knowledge transfer among professionals from a study by Asmi, Rasli, Majid, and Rahman (2009) The Inadequacies factor also informs consultant companies that they have the responsibility to provide adequate facilities for easy access for knowledge sharing and to provide working environments and relationships that enhance employees' loyalty to the company. Newell, Bresnen, Edelman, Scarbrough and Swan (2006) noted that lack of systems and tools in organizations hindered cross-project knowledge transfer. Likewise, knowledge transfer can even be deterred by factors such as improper office layout (Fong and Choi, 2009)

The Irrelevance factor contains knowledge transfer deterrents bb03, bb02, and bb09. This factor relates to the irrelevance of the knowledge to the receiver as perceived by the CPD participant. This factor implies that the knowledge obtained by the participant is not necessarily consistent with the requirements of his workplace. Assuming that the participant is very discriminating about the choice of CPD activities, it fiuther implies that there will be some knowledge that is irrelevant to the workplace. The Irrelevance factor concurs with Asmi et al (2009) who found that among others, personal interest and business competition impacted on transfer of leaming Malaysian construction consulting organizations. They also discovered that learning on the job and personal experience were common characteristics of construction consulting professionals. The three variables that constitute Irrelevance are about the insignificance and irrelevance of the knowledge to the work of colleagues and work direction. Thus, providers of CPD activities are challenged to provide speakers with knowledge that are relevant. Ari f i and Torrance (2008) noted that quality and irrelevance of the CPD knowledge deterred Malaysian registered quantity surveyors from attending CPD activities. They were however more motivated to attend a CPD activity when the speaker is from a more developed region. Such speakers have auras of expertise. This preference for learning from 'experts' was also noted among construction industry designers by Emmitt (2001). Yet, knowledge relevance is contingent. Knowledge is more valuable when it embeds context. Such knowledge is tacit rather than explicit. Swapping of stories about contexts and experiences among people would expand their repertoire of the application of the knowledge (Maqsood, Walker, and Finegan, 2007). Hence, explicit and even tacit knowledge from 'ezpert' speakers from more developed regions may be irrelevant to the circumstances under which the audience work. The application of the new knowledge may be fragmented and suit certain current practices and certain occasions. The important role of knowledge repositories expounded in knowledge management literature implies the contingent relevance of knowledge - knowledge is stored to be accessible when needed. This is especially viable for explicit knowledge. Fong and Choi (2009) found that Hong Kong quantity surveying firms mostly preferred to store their explicit knowledge in paper and electronic media. Knowledge was also 'stored' in the work routines and in their memory. Thus, even if a potential participant were to target CPD activities that are relevant to his current practice, there is always potential 'immediate' irrelevance in parts of the contents of the CPD. The CPD knowledge gained is both explicit and tacit. The irrelevance of the explicit knowledge will disappear when a suitable work situation requires the accessing of the

3 3 7 I P a g e

knowledge for application. Likewise the same applies for CPD-sourced tacit knowledge that is used and transferred on the job.

6.0 CONCLUSION

The findings in this paper is from a follow-up survey that among others aims to identify the strength of and categories (factors) of deterrents to the sharing of the professionals' knowledge gained from Continuing Professional Development activities with non-participants in their consultant firms. Two hundred and twenty five licensed and principal professionals from Malaysian consultant firms from various professions listed in the Persatuan Arkitek Malaysia Directory 200712008 were surveyed by mail on CPD and resulted in 55 respondents. The top three deterrents (mean scores) are disinterest by others, task irrelevance, and firm's work direction irrelevance. Factor analysis of the deterrents generated two categories (factors) of deterrents to the sharing of the professionals' CPD knowledge with subordinates and peers in their consultant firms which are Inadequacies and Irrelevance. The findings inform professionals and CPD providers to provide mechanisms that decreases the inadequacies and irrelevance of knowledge.

Acknowledgement: This whole study is funded under the Fundamental Research Grant Scheme of Malaysia. We thank the Research Management Institute of Universiti Teknologi MARA for administrative help. This paper provides part of the total findings.

REFERENCES

Asmi, A., Rasli, A., Majid, M.Z.A., and Rahman, LA. (2009, July) Malaysian practitioner's perception on knowledge management in construction consulting companies. Modern Applied Science, 3(7), 103- 114. Retrieved lob August 2009 from http://www.ccsenet.orp/jomal.html

Ariffin, M.H. and Torrance, V.J. (2008). Social group related participation motivations for continuing professional development activities among Malaysian registered quantity surveyors. Journal of Construction in Developing Countries, 13(2).

Accessed 2nd February 2008 at htrp:llwwwhbp.usm.my/jcdc/images/HBP%20BPAGESbp5.htm Argote, L and Ingram, P (2000, May). Knowledge transfer: A basis for competitive advantage in firms.

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 150-169 Benner, P. (1984). From novice to expert. San Francisco, CA: Addison-Wesley. Emmitt, S. (2001). Technological gatekeepers: the management of trade literature by design offices,

Engineering Construction andArchitectura1 Management, 8(1), 2-8. Fong, P.S.W. and Choi, S.K.Y. (2009). The processes of knowledge management in professional services

fums in the construction industry: a critical assessment of both theory and practice. Journal of Knowledge Management, 13(2), 110-126,

Gold, J., Thorpe, R., Woodall, J., and Sadler-Smith, E (2007). Continuing professional development in the legal profession: a practice-based learning perspective. Management Learning, 38(2), 235-250

Maqsood, T., Walker, D.H.T., and Finegan, A.D. (2007). Facilitating knowledge pull to deliver innovation through knowledge management: A case study. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 14(1) 94-109

Newell, S., Bresnen, M., Edelman, L., Scarbrough, H. and Swan, J. (2006). Sharing knowledge across projects: limits to ICT-led project review practices. Management Learning, 37(2), 167-85.

OECD. 1996 The knowledge based economy. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development: Paris. Accessed : April 5,2001 http:/www.oecd.org/dsti/sti/sSt~inte/pro~pde.pdf

- - 3 3 8 I P a g e

OECD. 1996 Ebe knowledge based economy. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development: Paris. Accessed : April 5,2001 http:/www.oecd.org/dsti/~ti/s~t/inte/prod/~de.pdf

Sense, A.J. (2007). Structuring the project environment for learning. International Journal of Project Management, 25,405-4 12

Schon, D. A. 1987. Educating the reflective practitioner. Jossey Bass Inc.:San Francisco. Swap, W., Leonard, D., Shields, M., and Abrams, L. (2001) Using Mentoring and Storytelling to Transfer

Knowledge in the Workplace. Journal ofMmagement Information Systems, 18(1), 95 - 1 14