Total views : 261

Developing Framework and Indicators for Assessing Organizational Intelligence


  • Department of MIS, Chungbuk National University, 28644, Korea


Background/Objectives: This study is to develop the indicators and framework for assessing organizational knowledge levels, apply the developed indicators and framework to an administrative entity, diagnose its organizational IQ level and seek some improvement measures. Methods/Statistical Analysis: For assessing factors’ weight score of organizational IQ Delphi surveys with 5-point Likert scale questionnaire and Analytical Hierarchy Process method were used. The Content Validity (CVR) was tested and a set of 39 indicators were selected for diagnosis. The AHP analysis was performed to estimate the weighted values of four categories. As a result, a total of 39 indicators across twelve divisions were identified and weighted by their significance priorities. To measure the organizational knowledge levels and to verify the applicability of the proposed indicators and framework we applied the model to a research institute affiliated with a local government. Findings: This study considers four fundamental elements of knowledge-friendly organizational culture. 39 indicators out of 52 candidates screened by the CVR reflects the opinion of expert panels. Specific indicators for each element were introduced to measure the influence factors. Four fundamental elements have a weight. In the order of weighted values are organizational flexibility (0.440), organizational rationality (0,261), organizational openness (0.216) and organizational cohesiveness (0.083) identified as the significant elements. The organizational flexibility involving formalization and transformational leadership were the most significant indicators. Also, among 39 indicators, ‘Flexibility in complying with business rules or procedures’ scored 0.114, which were the most significant indicator, followed by ‘the easy-to-use information system’, ‘trust in superiors’, ‘empowerment through learning’. The lowest weighted value was also found in ‘organizational members’ involvement in decision making’. The empirical analysis revealed that the proposed organizational IQ measurement contributed to identify the status of organizational knowledge management and the aspects that would require support for approaches to improve measures. Application/Improvements: The quantitative findings from this study will provide fresh insight to policy development for organizational knowledge management and the adoption of IT-based KMS, particularly to those organizations being skeptical about the return on their investments and those that have already adopted knowledge management systems only to see mediocre or unsatisfactory results


AHP, CVR, Delphi, Indicators of Organizational IQ, Organizational Intelligence

Full Text:

 |  (PDF views: 288)


  • Wigg KM, Spek R. Supporting knowledge management: A selection of methods and techniques. Expert Systems with Applications. 1997; 13(1):1–15.
  • JeongGue L. An exploration on the leverage factors of organizational knowledge growth dynamics (A Comparison of the private and the public Enterprises). Chungbuk National University; 2011.
  • Nonaka I, Takeuchi H. The knowledge creating company. Oxford University Press;1995. p. 167–9.
  • Drucker FP. Post-capitalist society. Oxford Butterworth Heinemann; 1993. p. 1–287.
  • Myers PS. Knowledge management and organizational design. Butterworth-Heinemann; 1996.
  • Davenport T, Prusack L. Working knowledge, how organization manage what they know. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press; 2000.
  • Min JH, Lee YC. Knowledge management capabilities, activities and empirical research. Korea Journal of Customer Satisfaction Research. 2004; 6(1):123–55.
  • Sang-hyeun P, Seoung-joon Y, Sang-wook K. Building a system dynamics model for strategic knowledge management in IT Company. Korean System Dynamics Society. 2002; 3(1):105–29.
  • Davenport T, Prusack L. Working knowledge. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press; 1998.
  • Saaty TL. The analytic hierarchy process. Mc-Graw Hill International; 1980.
  • Lovelace RF. Stimulating creativity through managerial intervention. R&D Management. 1986; 16(1):161–74.
  • Senge PM. The Fifth Discipline: The art and pratice of the learning Organization. New York: Currency Doubleday; 1990.
  • Ichiro SK. (鈴木 勘一郞). Organizational IQ (Intelligence Quotient - The realization of speed management. 野村總 合硏究所編 2001.
  • Lawshe CH. A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology. 1975; 28(1):563–75.
  • Satty TL. Multicriteria decision making: The analytic hierarchy process. RWS Publications. 1990; 16(3):175–91.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.