1. (Diisi oleh RMC)
One (1) copy of this form must be submitted to the Institution of Higher Education Excellence Planning Division,
Department of Higher Education, Level 7, No. 2, Tower 2, Street P5/6, Precinct 5, 62200 Putrajaya.
[Incomplete Form will be rejected]
A TITLE OF PROPOSED RESEARCH:
Tajuk penyelidikan yang dicadangkan :
A NEW KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK FOR PUBLIC ORGANISATIONS
MANAGING CONSTRUCTION INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
B DETAILS OF RESEARCHER / MAKLUMAT PENYELIDIK
B(i) Name of Project Leader: IC / Passport Number:
Nama Ketua Projek: No. Kad Pengenalan/ Pasport:
Assoc. Prof. Sr. Dr. Padzil @ Fadzil bin Hassan 600524-01-5203
B(ii) Position (Please tick ( √ )):
Jawatan (Sila tanda ( √ )):
Professor Assoc. Prof. / Sen. Lect. Lecturer
Profesor Prof. Madya / P. Kanan Pensyarah
B(iii) Faculty/School/Centre/Unit (Please provide full address):
Fakulti/Jabatan /Pusat/Unit (Sila nyatakan alamat penuh):
Fakulti of Architecture, Planning and Surveying
Universiti Teknologi MARA
40450 Shah Alam, Selangor
B(iv) Office Telephone No.: 03 - 55211670 Handphone No.: 017 - 3708483
No. Telefon Pejabat: No. Telefon Bimbit:
B(v) E-mail Address: padzil037@salam.uitm.edu.my
Alamat e-mel:
Kod Rujukan:
√
a
s
d
BORANG FRGS – A1 (R)
SINGLE DISCIPLINARY PROJECT
APPLICATION FORM
FUNDAMENTAL RESEARCH GRANT SCHEME (FRGS)
Skim Geran Penyelidikan Fundamental
(Pindaan 1/2012)
JABATAN PENGAJIAN TINGGI
KEMENTERIAN PENGAJIAN TINGGI

2. B(vi) Date of first appointment with this University: 1.6.1989
Tarikh mula berkhidmat dengan Universiti ini:
B(vii) Type of Service (Please tick ( √ )):
Jenis Perkhidmatan (Sila tanda ( √ )):
Permanent Contract (State contract expiry date):
Tetap Kontrak (Nyatakan tarikh tamat kontrak): ____________________
C RESEARCH INFORMATION / MAKLUMAT PENYELIDIKAN
C(i) Research Area (Please tick ( √ )):
Bidang Penyelidikan (Sila tanda ( √ )):
A. Pure Science (Sains Tulen)
Chemistry Physic Biology
(Kimia) (Fizik) (Biologi)
Biochemistry Materials Science Mathematics and Statistics
(Biokimia) (Sains Bahan) (Matematik dan Statistik)
B. Applied Science (Sains Gunaan)
Chemistry Physic Biology
(Kimia) (Fizik) (Biologi)
Mathematics and Statistics Computer Science Biotechnology
(Matematik dan Statistik) (Sains Komputer) (Bioteknologi)
Materials Science
(Sains Bahan)
C. Technology and Engineering (Teknologi dan Kejuruteraan)
Mechanical & Manufacturing Electrical and Electronic Civil
(Mekanikal dan Pembuatan) (Elektrikal dan Elektronik) (Awam)
Material and Polymer Chemical Engineering Information and Communication
(Bahan dan Polimer) (Kejuruteraan Kimia) Technology
(Teknologi Komunikasi dan
Informasi)
Energy Transportation
(Tenaga) (Pengangkutan)

3. D. Clinical and Health Sciences (Sains Kesihatan dan Klinikal)
Basic Medical Sciences Pharmacy Pharmacology
(Sains Perubatan Asas) (Farmasi) (Farmakologi)
Medical Microbiology Parasitology Pathology
(Mikrobiologi Perubatan) (Parasitologi) (Pathologi)
Community Medical Prevention Clinical Surgical Clinical Medical
(Perubatan Pencegahan (Klinikal Surgikal) (Klinikal Medikal)
Masyarakat)
Associate Health Science Dental Nursing Science
(Sains Kesihatan Bersekutu) (Pergigian) (Sains Kejururawatan)
E. Social Sciences (Sains Sosial)
Anthropology Psychology Sociology
(Antropologi) (Psikologi) (Sosiologi)
Political Science Business and Management Geography
(Sains Politik) (Pengurusan dan Perniagaan) (Geografi)
Economic Human Ecology Communication
(Ekonomi) (Ekologi Manusia) (Komunikasi)
F. Arts and Applied Arts (Sastera dan Sastera Ikhtisas)
Language and Linguistic Literature Religion
(Bahasa dan Linguistik) (Kesusasteraan) (Agama)
Philosophy Civilization History
(Falsafah) (Tamadun) (Sejarah)
Art Culture Education
(Seni) (Budaya) (Pendidikan)
Principle and Law Built Environment Environment
(Dasar dan Undang-undang) (Alam Bina- (Alam Sekitar-
Aspek Kemanusiaan) Aspek Kemanusiaan)
G. Natural Sciences and National Heritage (Sains Tabii dan Warisan Negara)
Environment Forestry Agriculture
(Alam Sekitar) (Perhutanan) (Pertanian)
Marine Archaeology Geology
(Marin) (Arkeologi) (Geologi)
Ethnography Built Environment Culture
(Etnografi) (Heritage Aspect) (Budaya)
Alam Bina (Aspek Warisan)
Biodiversity
(Kepelbagaian Biologi)

4. C(ii) Location of Research:
Tempat penyelidikan dijalankan:
(Contoh / Example ) : Animal Experimental Unit, Animal Laboratory Center, Faculty of Medicine, University
Malaya, 50603 Lembah Pantai, Kuala Lumpur
1. Centre for Construction Project and Infrastructure Management
Faculty of Architecture, Planning and Surveying
Universiti Teknologi MARA
40450 Shah Alam, Selangor
2. Enterprise Content and Knowledge Management Unit
Cawangan Projek Kompleks
Ibu Pejabat Jabatan Kerja Raya Malaysia
Jalan Sultan Salahuddin
50582 Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur
C(iii) Duration of this research (Maximum 36 months):
Tempoh masa penyelidikan ini (Maksimum 36 bulan):
Duration: 24 bulan
Tempoh :
From : 1 Ogos 2013
Dari :
To : 31 Julai 2015
Hingga :
C(iv) Other Researchers:
Ahli-ahli penyelidik yang lain:
(Please include maximum 5 pages of curriculum vitae for each researcher)
Bil Name
Nama
IC / Passport
Number:
No. Kad Pengenalan/
Pasport:
Faculty/ School/
Centre/ Unit
Fakulti/
P.Pengajian/
Pusat/Unit
Academic
Qualification/
Designation
Tahap Kelayakan
Akademik/Jawatan
Signature
Tandatangan
1 Dr Zulhabri Ismail 760923-03-5327
Faculty of
Architecture,
Planning and
Surveying/
Research
Management
Institute
PhD in Built
Environment/
Lecturer DM52
2

5. C(v) Research projects that have been completed or ongoing by project leader for the last three years.
Please provide title of research, grant’s name, position, duration, year commence and year ending.
Sila sediakan maklumat termasuk termasuk tajuk, nama geran, peranan, tempoh, tahun mula dan tahun tamat
bagi penyelidikan yang sedang/telah dijalankan oleh ketua penyelidik dalam tempoh tiga tahun terakhir.
Title of Research
Tajuk penyelidikan
Grant’s Name
Nama Geran
Position / Role
Jawatan / Peranan
Duration
Tempoh
Start Date
Tarikh mula
End Date
Tarikh
tamat
Preliminary Cost Estimate &
Cost Planning
JKR Principal Investigator 12 months August 2012 August 2013
Construction industry
Development Board (CIDB)-
University technology MARA
(UiTM)-Salford University
collaborative research to
support the Construction
Industry Master Plan (CIMP)
CIDB Head of Project 60 months
November
2009
November
2014
A Study on the Malaysiaa
Legal Framework and Risk
Management: Design
Professionals
FRGS Principal Investigator 12 months April 2009 April 2010
The Critical Assessment of
SMM2 in Preparation for
SMM3
The Institution of
Surveyors
Malaysia
Co-Investigator 12 months March 2010 March 2011
Construction Disputes and
Build Projects in Malaysia
UiTM RMI
Excellent Grant
Principal Investigator 12 months June 2009 June 2010
Entry participant of Licensed
Construction Professionals in
Continuing Professional
Development Activities
FRGS Principal Investigator 12 months June 2008 June 2009
C(vi) Please provide information on academic publications that has been published by the project leader for
the last five (5) years. (Example: Journals, Books, Chapters in books, etc)
Sila kemukakan maklumat berkaitan penerbitan akademik yang telah diterbitkan oleh ketua penyelidik dalam
tempoh lima (5) tahun terakhir. (Contoh: Jurnal, buku, bab dalam buku, dll)
Title of publication
Tajuk penerbitan
Name of journals/books
Nama jurnal/buku
Year published
Tahun diterbitkan
Re-learning design and build
implementation process in Malaysia:
Findings from a workshop
CHUSER 2012 - 2012 IEEE Colloquium on
Humanities, Science and Engineering Research,
pp. 314-318
2012
Soft Skills Implementation in
Construction
Management Program: A survey of
Malaysian
Public Universities.
IEEE Symposium on Humanities, Science and
Engineering Research, pp. 1533-1538
2012

6. The Criticality of Quality
Management in Building Corporate
Resilience in a Post Recession
Period
European Journal of Social Sciences, ISSN: 1450-
2267. Vol. 18, No 3
2011
Is Corporate Social Responsibility
(CSR) Agenda Losing Momentum
with Recession?
International Bulletin Of Business Administration,
Issue 10 ISSN: 1451-243x
2011
Bloom's Taxonomy in the Provision
of Quantity Surveying Degree
Programme
Business, Symposium on Engineering and Industrial
Applications (ISBEIA), pp.431 - 436
2011
An evaluation of the Competencies,
Skills and Knowledge of Quantity
Surveying Graduates in Consultant
Quantity Surveying firms in
Malaysia
IEEE Colloquium on Humanities, Science and
Engineering (CHUSER), pp. 228-232 2011
A Critical Assessment of the
Challenges of Developing the
Malaysian Construction Workforce
through Training
IEEE Colloquium on Humanities, Science and
Engineering (CHUSER), pp. 223-227 2011
Tracking architectural defects in the
Malaysian hospital projects IEEE Symposium on Business, Engineering and
Industrial Applications (ISBEIA), pp. 298-302
2011
Fundamental elements of
sustainable private financing
initiative contracts
IEEE Symposium on Business, Engineering and
Industrial Applications, pp. 334-339
2011
Sustainable Private Financing
Initiative Contracts
IEEE Symposium on Business, Engineering and
Industrial Applications (ISBEIA), pp. 452-457
2011
Green Campus Initiative Framework
at UCSI University and Proposed
Framework
Business & Management Quarterly Review Vol. 1,
No. 3, pp. 14-27.
2010
Academic Enterpreneurship and
Innovation in Higher Education: An
Integrated Framework for Malaysian
Universities
6th World Scientific and Engineering Academy and
Society (WSEAS) International Conference on
Educational Technologies (EDUTE’ 10), pp. 30-35
2010
An Exploratory Study on Peer
Learning Experiences in the
Architectural Design Studio
6th World Scientific and Engineering Academy and
Society (WSEAS) International Conference on
Educational Technologies (EDUTE’ 10), pp. 36-42
2010
Enhancing Employability of
Graduates through Educational
Collaboration with professional
Institutions: The Experience of the
Faculty of Built Environment,
University of Malaya
6th World Scientific and Engineering Academy and
Society (WSEAS) International Conference on
Educational Technologies (EDUTE’ 10), pp. 42-47
2010

7. Technology transfer (TT) and
technology exchange (TE) in
Malaysia International Conference on Education and
Management Technology (ICEMT), pp. 6-12
2010
Meanings and Interchangeability of
Continuing Professional
Development (CPD), Training and
Education, and their Connection,
and their Influence on Learning and
Development in Built Environment
Asean Journal of Teaching and Learning in the
Higher Education (AJTLHE), Vol. 1, No.1, pp.1-7,
2010
Enhancing Employability of
Graduates through Educational
Collaboration with professional
Institutions: The Experience of the
Faculty of Built Environment,
University of Malaya”,
6
th
WSEAS/IASME International Conference on
Educational Technologies
2010
Best Practice Framework for
Construction Workforce Training
3rd WSEAS International Conference on Energy
Planning, Energy Saving, Environmental Education
(EPESE’09), pp. 191-195
2009
A Framework for Designing Training
for Site Managers
3rd WSEAS International Conference on Energy
Planning, Energy Saving, Environmental Education
(EPESE’09), pp. 196-200
2009
Research Design and Data
Collection Techniques for
Investigating People-environment
Behavior
3rd WSEAS International Conference on Energy
Planning, Energy Saving, Environmental Education
(EPESE’09), pp. 212-218
2009
Intangibles in the Built Environment:
The Emerging Challenge Facing the
Surveying Profession.
The Professional Journal of The Institution
of Surveyors, Vol. 44. No 3, pp.18-22 2009
Continuing Professional
Development, Training and
Education As Part of Technology
For Learning Process in Built
Environment”,
7th WSEAS International Conference on Education
and Educational Technology (EDU’08), pp. 157-162 2008
“An Empirical Study on the Training
Needs of Construction Site
Managers”
Association of Researchers in Construction
Management, ARCOM 2005 - Proceedings of the
21st Annual Conference 1 , pp. 95-104 2005
C(vii) Executive Summary of Research Proposal (maximum 300 words)
(Please include the background of research, literature reviews, objectives, research methodology and
expected outcomes from the research project)
Ringkasan Cadangan Eksekutif Penyelidikan (maksimum 300 patah perkataan)
(Meliputi latar belakang penyelidikan, kajian literatur, kaedah penyelidikan, objektif dan jangkaan hasil
penyelidikan)
The practice of knowledge management, driven by change to adopt of new technology and procurement
systems in public organisations managing inforastucture projects has been recognised as one of the key
enablers for achieving operational effectiveness. This has led to the consequent increase in the numbers of
research in this area over the last two decades. The driving challenge has been to establish new knowledge
management concepts which can be applied to public project management organisations. Various results have
been recorded from the application of these concepts in practice. Some have found the concepts very
successful whereas some have failed badly. Numerous follow up studies have been carried out to understand
the shortcomings of the application of these concepts, and various strategies for moving forward have come to

8. the fore.
The application of knowledge management in public project management organisations is relatively new and is
evolving dynamically. Many suggestions have been proposed. These can be exemplified amongst others from
concepts that link the knowledge management to strategic management (Davenport and Prusak, 2000; Wong
and Aspinwall, 2005), knowledge management to communities of practice (Schenkel and Teigland, 2008;
Wenger and Snyder, 2000), knowledge manahgement fo organizational learning (Argyris and Schön,1978;
Yang, 2007) and knowledge management to innovation (Egbu, 2004; Nonaka and Takeuchi,1995). While
there has been much support for application of these concepts, equally there has been much critic that argues
their limitations and in their effective application in the project management for public organisations. Central to
most of the critics are that these concepts are too theoretical, too rigid and are not holistic enough to be
applicable to organisations in variable project settings. Preliminary studies undertaken by this proposal suggest
that the development of a knowledgement framework which is able to incorporate the eco-systems and
variables within and surrounding the public project management organisation is possible. To date there has
been a dearth of research that specifically study these integration and linkages, and the impact of the variable
elements of the public project organisations within their eco-systems.
It is the aim of this research to bridge this knowledge gap by developing a new knowledge management
framework that integrates all the key elements that impact knowledge management in public project
management organisations. It is envisages that with this framework, it is envisaged that the framework will be
able to offer a more holistic conception of the internal and external factors which impact the design and
implementation of knowledge management within these organisations.
C(viii) Detailed proposal of research project:
Cadangan maklumat penyelidikan secara terperinci:
(a) Research background including Hypothesis /Research Questions and Literature Reviews.
Keterangan latar belakang penyelidikan termasuk kenyataan hipotesis / persoalan penyelidikan dan
kajian literatur.
Background to the research
The conceptual framework drawn to structure the
research theoretical framework and the establishment of
the research problem statement is shown in Figure 1.
The Theoretical Framework
Knowledge management
Why knowledge mangement?
The emergence of knowledge management as one of
the latest strategic management approaches in recent
years have evolved from the need for a better and
systematic way of managing organisational knowledge
in order to propel organisations toward superior
business growth and competitive advantage, achievable
by leveraging their knowledge assets. Prior to the
introduction of knowledge management, organisations
have been managing knowledge arbitrarily and in an
unstructured manner, often with the absence of any
proper strategy as guidance. However, due to the
pressure of global competition and changes in market
condition, this approach is deemed no longer relevant to
ensure effective adaptation to the changing landscape.
Fig. 1

9. The survival of organisations in today’s uncertain economic times is very much dependent upon their ability
to adapt and acclimate successfully to the changing climate (Chan and Scott-Ladd, 2004; Loermans, 2002).
Failure to act in a timely manner will only lead these organisations to a greater risk of becoming irrelevant.
Thus, the necessity for organisations to continuously adapt and innovate in order to remain competitive and
viable in the new environment is of highly significant. Over the last two decades, knowledge has been
regarded as among the most critical strategic resources of an organisation for sustained competitive
advantage and innovation. This necessitates knowledge in organisations to be effectively and systematically
managed before wealth generation, sustainable growth and competitive advantage can be achieved (Durst
and Edvardsson, 2012).
Approaches to knowledge management
Generally, there are two commonly adopted approaches to knowledge management; the codification and the
personalization (Jasimuddin, 2008). The former focuses on making knowledge more explicit, by viewing
knowledge as an object which can be manipulated, transferred and stored (Alavi & Leidner, 2001). In this
approach, technology especially ICT plays an important role in capturing and disseminating the knowledge.
Technology is used extensively to expedite the diffusion of knowledge through intranet, groupware and email.
In fact, many acknowledged that the explosion of knowledge management was attributed to the advent of
technology. Hence, it would unthinkable nowadays to carry out proper knowledge management activities
without having in place the appropriate technology. However, it must be noted that technology is not
knowledge management; instead it should be considered to be one of the key enablers in the implementation
(Loermans, 2002; Secton and Senaratne, 2008). On the other hand, the personalization approach is more
concerned with connecting people, taking the more traditional route of sharing individual and organisational
knowledge between individuals. This approach focuses on extracting and exploiting tacit knowledge, the type
of knowledge that is highly contextual and is obtained through experience, observation and reflection that
resides largely in human minds (Davenport & Prusak, 2000; Quintas, 2005). Techniques such as
Communities of Practice (Lave & Wenger, 1991), After Action Review and Knowledge Networks (Alavi &
Leidner, 2001) provide appropriate means of humanized approaches toward individuals with a common
interest and shared understanding to interact with each others in the most appropriate and conducive
environment for sharing knowledge (O'Dell & Hubert, 2011).
It must be noted that in knowledge management, it would be premature to focus on just one approach while
neglecting the other as it would jeopardize the overall effectiveness of the knowledge management process.
For instance, too much emphasis on the use of technology in capturing and managing explicit knowledge
may lead to the loss of opportunity for organisations to unearth the valuable tacit knowledge that resides in
the minds of employees. In contrary, by putting too much effort and time on capturing tacit knowledge, the
advantage offered by technology in terms of expediting communications and effective knowledge transfer
would come to waste.
Challenge of integrating variables in knowledge management
Thus, it would require a concerted effort by the organisation to continuously finding suitable ways to take full
advantage of both approaches in an integrated manner (Tan et al., 2012). A study by Oluikpe (2012) which
explores the development of knowledge management strategy in a financial instruction fittingly demonstrates
the benefit gained by the organisation in striking a balance between the utilization of technology and people
approach through communities of practice and a functional portal which together successfully drove the
implementation and managed to increase the knowledge flows across the organisation.
Public project management organisations
Knowledge management and the Construction Industry Master Plan (CIMP)
The importance of knowledge management to project management organisations has been highlighted in the
Construction Industry Master Plan (CIMP), a 10-year strategic transformation plan (2006 – 2015) to reform
the construction industry. This can be exemplified from the CIMP Strategic Thrust No 6: To leverage on
Information Communication Technology (ICT) in the construction industry. Underpinning thie structegic thrust
is the need for the industry to adopt knowledge sharing through nurturing continuous improvement practices
by sharing information such as standards and regulations, best practices and job opportunities (CIDB, 2006).

10. However, despite all the initiatives and promotions there has be little to show that the initiatives have been
successful (Hassan, 2011). Due to the inherent characteristic of the construction industry that is extremely
fragmented and transient in nature, this creates an environment that inhibits knowledge sharing and
continous learning activities to take place (Bishop, Bouchlaghem, Glass, & Matsumoto, 2008).
In Malaysia there are many public organisations that are tasked with the responsibility to manage
infrastructure projects. This includes the including Public Works Department (PWD), Department of Irrigation
and Drainage (DID), Highway Authority, city and municipality councils, and in-house project management
departments of ministries and semi-government agencies. As the nation’s leading public project
implementation organizations, these organisations play important roles in the growth of country’s
construction industry and the overall economy as a whole and are committed in their mission to meet
stakeholders’ expectation by providing the best possible services through successful project delivery
undertaken by them completed within the stipulated quality, timeframe and cost parameters (JKR, 2010b). As
one of the key players in the construction industry, these public project management organisations relies
heavily on information and knowledge to ensure the effective and efficient planning, construction and delivery
of infrastructure projects. Therefore, the need to manage project tacit and explicit knowledge is seen as
highly critical and crucial. Only by having proper knowledge management techniques in place, construction
organisations will be able to leverage on intellectual capital, which resulted in avoiding repetiting costly
mistakes and minimising time wastage by reinventing the wheels (Hassan, 2011).
Knowledge Management in the Public Project Management Organisations
Drivers
As calls for better and improved public service delivery continue to be demanded by the public in recent
years, this has left the public organisations including public project management organisations with no other
options but to move forward in finding innovative ways to meet the ever growing expectations (Luen & Al-
Hawamdeh, 2001). Moreover, continual public pressure for the public sector to demonstrate greater
accountability and transparency in delivering public policy at the expense of fewer resources requires the
public sector to conduct a critical evaluation of their current procedures and policies (Riege & Lindsay, 2006).
Taken this into consideration, one of the approaches that have been taken under public sector transformation
programs is to harness the organisational collective intelligence along with external knowledge resources
which underline the need to institutionalize knowledge management in the public sector.
According to the Wiig (2002), a successful implementation of a comprehensive knowledge management can
deliver broad and significant benefits to the public sector and the nation as a whole as it helps to develop
competent and effective public services to ensure that public interests and agendas are pursued
appropriately, prepare the public to become effective policy partners who participate in public decision
making, build and leverage public and private intellectual capital which will then lead to pursuing priority
initiatives that improve performance and competitiveness and developing capable knowledge workers that
are able to perform skilled and knowledge-intensive tasks. In the same vein, Riege & Lindsay (2006) highlight
the critical role plays by knowledge management especially the knowledge sharing process in facilitating two
way transfers of scientific and socially-based knowledge between the public sector and the stakeholders
towards the development of better public policy. Similar to Wiig (2002), the authors highlight four main
reasons why knowledge management is getting increased attention from the public sector as follows:
i. To drive efficiencies across all public services by connecting silos of information
ii. To develop new or consolidating outdated systems to improve overall performance
iii. To improve accountability and mitigating risk by making informed decisions and resole issued
faster
iv. To deliver better and more cost-effective constituent services such as enhancing partnerships with,
and responsiveness to, the public
Vexing issues of knowledge management implementation
Nonetheless, despites many realizing the benefits offered by the knowledge management, studies found that
the uptake among public organisations in implementing knowledge management is still low as compared to
the private organisations (Butler and Murphy, 2007; Cong & Pandya, 2003; Sandhu, Jain, and Ahmad, 2011;
Yang 2007). Among the research that has been done to examine the practice of knowledge management in
public organisations includes studies in accounting (Chong, Salleh, Ahmad and Syed-Ikhsan, 2011),
agriculture (Talisayon, 2013) and police work (Biygautane & Al-Yahya, 2011; Luen & Al-Hawamdeh, 2001;
Seba & Rowley, 2010). Tol date, there has not been any study addressing knowledge management

11. implementation in public project management organisations. The main reason for the slow adoption of
knowledge management among public organisations can be attributed primarily to the underlying differences
in visions, missions, procedures and culture between the two sectors (Chawla & Joshi, 2010; Cong, Li-Hua, &
Stonehouse, 2007; Cong & Pandya, 2003).
Whilst the public sector is mostly driven by a set policy and politics, which place strong emphasis on
providing quality public service delivery to the stakeholders, the profit oriented private sector is predominantly
driven by its strategy, structure and culture to serve its shareholders (Abdullah & Date, 2009; Chong, Salleh,
Ahmad, & Sharifuddin, 2011). As the private sector is constantly exploring new and innovative approaches to
remain relevant and competitive, the lack of competitive edge in the public sector has led to the lack of
interest and slow adoption of knowledge management within the sector (Cong & Pandya, 2003; Sandhu,
Jain, & Ahmad, 2011; Yao, Kam, & Chan, 2007). MAMPU (2010) in its study of knowledge management
implementation in Malaysia reveals that out of 94 government agencies being reviewed in 2010; only 12% of
them have a knowledge management strategy. This worrying trend is causing lots of concern to the
stakeholders on whether the civil servants are fully equipped with the right knowledge and competence in
facilitating them in making informed decisions and formulating public policies for the betterment of all.
Realizing this predicament and the loss of opportunities to better enhance public service delivery, various
efforts have been taken by the governments in promoting and encouraging the adoption of knowledge
management in the public sector including organizing awareness programs such seminars, trainings and
workshops on the discipline (Biygautane & Al-Yahya, 2011). However, due to its inherent characteristics that
are traditionally rigid, hierarchical and bureaucratic along with other broad range of issues and challenges
unique to the public sector, the process can be much more challenging as compared to the private sector
(Chong et al., 2011). Unless these issues and challenges are addressed accordingly in a timely manner, they
will adversely impact the effectiveness of knowledge management implementation in the public sector.
The challenge to contextualise knowledge management knowledge management in public project
management organisations
The implementation of knowledge management in public project management public organisations is not a
straightforward task. There can be no one-size-fits-all knowledge management solution that can simply be
adopted. Knowledge management itself is highly contextual and unique for every organisation. Public project
management organisations are inevitably confronted with a range issues that will have adverse impact on the
knowledge management initiative and it is agreat challenge is to contend with the spectrum of elements
which are inherent to the project organisation. The variables can range from the organisational strategic
management system, the organisational structure, knowledge gaps, operational procedures to people issues.
These are exacerbated further by the differing project size, location, procurement systems and contractual
settings which these organisations undertake. Some of the issues are salient and can only be presented by
a list of vaguely and briefly defined factors. Often, these leads to a lot of confusion and misunderstanding,
especially in the endeavour design and operate to a knowledge management system that works.
Inability to contend with this issues often leads to unwanted failure. (Chua & Lam, 2005; Conley and Wei,
2009). In their studies, Akhavan, Jafari, & Fathian (2005) found that the failure rate knowledge management
projects in organisations are between 50% and 70%. There is no assurance of knowledge management
success, regardless of the amount of investment being made. A key pre-requisite to potentially successful
knowledge management initiative is the ability to address these variable issues (Riege, 2005). In the effort to
circumvent these issues, various knowledge management concepts have emerged from research to propose
the way forward for the implementation of knowledge management in organisations, public and private alike.
While there has been much support for these concepts, equally there has been much critic that argues their
practical applicability in the actual implementation. The central theme to most of the critiques are that the
frameworks are too theoretical, high-level and are not flexible enough to be applicable to organisations in
organisational settings.
Preliminary studies undertaken by this research proposal suggest that this variability are influenced by the
contextual uniqueness of the organisation itself and the ecosystem within which it evolves. However, there
has been a paucity of research that have been successful in integrating all these elements together. The
main findings emerging from the preliminary study of these concepts are the significance of the critical
elements which needs to integrated. This includes the organisational strategy and governance, the element
of community, organisational learning, innovation, the impact of information technology and the embodiment
of common shared values and accordingly the interrelationships between all these elements to knowledge
management. This proposal posits that an integrated framework which can link all the existing variable

12. elements of the frameworks can possibly be developed to offer a holistic conception of the adoption of
knowledge management in public project management organisations.
Issues and challenges in implementing Knowledge Management in public project management
organisations
While there have been many literatures which highlight the issues and challenges faced by the private sector
in implementing knowledge management, unfortunately there is a paucity of research conducted in
addressing the factors that inhibit knowledge management within the public project management
organisations. Based on a preliminary critical review conducted on the literature pertaining to the problems
faced by public organisations in implementing knowledge management, the proposal found the list of barriers
which confront the application of knowledge management which can be adapted to public project
management organisations as follows:
A. Individual
Lack of awareness and understanding
Several researches suggest that employees’ lack of awareness and understanding of knowledge
management as one of the main reasons that is causing the organisation within the public sector
to continue to struggle in implementing the initiative (Biygautane & Al-Yahya, 2011; Cong et al.,
2007; Cong & Pandya, 2003; Yuen, 2007). As a relatively new discipline especially in the public
sector, the majority of the civil servants is still not aware of the concept of knowledge
management, the activities involved in the processes and the benefits it brings to individual and
organisation (Cong et al., 2007). The inadequacy of information leads to a widespread confusion
and misunderstanding among employees especially those from the lower levels with regards to
their expected roles and responsibilities. As a result, many are reluctant to take part actively in
the knowledge-based activities organized by the organisations as they perceive the activities to
be secondary and trivial in nature which are of no real value to them in particular.
Lack of values for knowledge sharing
Knowledge sharing is considered as the cornerstone of knowledge management, without which,
the success of the initiative is far from. Unfortunately, the lack of knowledge sharing is pretty
much prevalent in the public sector (Cong et al., 2007; Salleh & Ahmad, 2009; Syed-Ikhsan &
Rowland, 2004a; Talisayon, 2013). This predicament can be attributed to a number of reasons.
For instance, employees, generally, view the knowledge they possess as a source of power.
Therefore they are unwilling to share their knowledge other out of fear that by doing so, it may
risk their value to the organisations and jeopardize any career advancement opportunities as well
as endangered their job security (Al-Athari & Zairi, 2001).
Poor communication and interpersonal skills
The success of knowledge management is very much dependent on the employees’ abilities and
skills to communicate and interact effectively with others. Employees who possess these traits
would have the ability to connect with others in social settings such as knowledge sharing
sessions without many difficulties. On the other hand, for those who are lacking in such skills
would find themselves unable to contribute or gain any significant benefits from the knowledge
related activities and may eventually lead to poor performance. Sandhu et al. (2011) in their
study of assessing the public sector employees perception towards the knowledge management
in Malaysia posit poor of verbal and interpersonal skills as one of the main individual barriers
apart from lack of time and lack of interaction that resulted in their low engagement in knowledge
sharing activities.
B. Organisation
Rigid and hierarchical organisation structure
Public sector in general is well renowned for its traditional rigid and hierarchical organisation
structure which is regulated by a set of rules and procedures. This type of mechanistic structure is
useful for large organisations such as public organisations as it helps to ensure smooth
operations with a clearly defined job scope and responsibilities, a strong chain of commands and
a rapid decision making process. Nevertheless, with such inflexibility, it would have resulted in

13. units and groups to operate in isolation, invisible and unreachable of each other. This segmented
structure will inevitably lead to the development of knowledge silos which are commonly
responsible for unnecessary duplication of knowledge, reinventing the wheel or repeating similar
mistakes in organisations (Cong et al., 2007; Conley & Wei, 2009).
Lack of a clear and concise knowledge management strategy
It is an acknowledged fact that the success of any initiatives in organisations is very much
dependent on the types of strategies being adopted and knowledge management is likewise. The
strategy will determine the overall approach and directions taken by the organisations in which
goals and objectives will be met. Therefore due to the absence of a comprehensive knowledge
management strategy, which consists of policies, procedures and activities for managing
organisational knowledge assets, the implementation is at risk. Yet, while many recognized the
importance of having a well-defined strategy to provide the basis to move forward (Oluikpe, 2012),
surprisingly, findings from a number of empirical studies reveal that there are still organisations
out there that do not have a knowledge management strategy in place (MAMPU, 2010).
Misalignment between knowledge management strategy and business strategy
Establishing an alignment between knowledge management and business strategy is essential to
ensure successful implementation of the initiative. This is critical to ensure the initiative will be
able to contribute effectively towards organisations growth and performance by taking into
consideration the organisation’s goals, objectives and others strategic related matters during the
development and deployment of knowledge management initiative. In the absence of a clear
association between both elements, which has been widely ignored in practice, the impact of
knowledge management in demonstrating the strategic importance will be minimal and this will
eventually affect employees’ perception and their further commitment in the initiative (Abdullah &
Date, 2009).
Dysfunctional organisational culture
Organisational culture, considered as the glue that binds the organisation together greatly
influences the process and outcomes of knowledge management within organisations. Thus,
dysfunctional organisational culture including over reliance on individual performance than team
efforts, minimum tolerance towards mistakes where mistakes are viewed negatively, a prevailing
blame culture and lack of innovation mindset are more likely to cause more harm than good and
serve as a major barrier to the organisation's continuous efforts in fostering an environment of
openness and cooperation for knowledge management to truly thrive (Sandhu et al., 2011; Yuen,
2007).
Lack of top management support and commitment
One of the key elements for long-term success in any new initiatives would be a visible and
continuous support and sponsorship by the top management and knowledge management in no
different (Bartczak, Rainer, Boulton, Oswald, & Malley, 2010). Nevertheless, due to some concern
purported by some critics that knowledge management as just another management fad and
other concurrently pressing organisational matters that require the immediate attention of the top
management, these issues will at times affect their commitment to the initiative. Without the much
needed support, it would be almost impossible to sustain further growth of the initiative, especially
in getting the resources such as budget and manpower to carry out the related activities and
convincing the employees on the importance of knowledge management discourse (Chong et al.,
2011).
Lack of rewards and recognition system
Creating a successful knowledge management requires active and continuous commitment from
the employees in terms of the amount of energy and time spent in participating in knowledge
related activities. Yet, even though many acknowledged the benefits knowledge management
offers, either at individual level or collectively as whole, employees as emotional beings would
strive more persistently in those activities when they are motivated. By simply depending on
employees' willingness to contribute their time and energy in the initiative would be somehow
premature and unrealistic (Al-Alawi, Al-Marzooqi, & Mohammed, 2007; Syed-Ikhsan & Rowland,
2004a).

14. Lack of performance measurement
As most of the public organisations are still in the early stages of setting up or implementing their
knowledge management programs, there is at present little emphasis given to assessing and
evaluating their effectiveness by using appropriate performance measurement methods. Whilst
many acknowledged the difficulties involved in performing such tasks due to the complexities in
understanding the intangible nature of knowledge and the fact that the impact of knowledge
management initiative may not be immediately visible, the lack of performance measurement can
be a cause for concern especially in demonstrating knowledge management practical value to
organisations (Al-Athari & Zairi, 2001; Bartczak et al., 2010).
C. Technolog
Inadequate IT systems and processes
It would unthinkable nowadays to implement knowledge management without having a proper
technology to support the initiative. In fact, it is widely reported in literature that the popularity
gained by knowledge management in recent years is partly due to the critical role played by
technology especially IT with regards its speed and efficiency in acquiring, capturing,
disseminating and managing knowledge. Having an effective knowledge management system in
place is therefore essential in providing the much needed support for knowledge management
activities (Hüttenegger, 2003).
Lack of training
Another potential barrier is lack of training on knowledge management tools and techniques
(Cong et al., 2007; Salleh & Ahmad, 2009). More often than not, the lack of training can be
caused by financial and time constraints faced by organisations in organizing the training
programs. Nonetheless, the importance of training must not be taken lightly. For instance, with
regards to the deployment of knowledge management systems, due to the lack or absence of
appropriate training program, employees are unable to utilize all the features available in the
systems to their full potential. Consequently, inefficiencies will creep in. This will eventually lead to
frustration and low employee morale.
Lack of security
In connection to technology, there is a genuine concern raised by employees over the issue of
security and confidentiality of information being posted and transmitted via the knowledge
management systems such as websites and online forums (Salleh & Ahmad, 2009). This is not a
baseless assertion as there have been many instances in the past where a string of high profile
websites and portals were susceptible to hacking and malware attacks due to loose security
measures (Grossman, 2013). And due to the exponential advancement of technology, these
vulnerabilities can be difficult to monitor and manage considering their rapidly evolving rate of
change.

15. Problem Statement
The constructs culminated from the literature review converge to proposition the problem statement as
shown in Figure 2:
Individual
Organisation
Technology
Lack of awareness &
understanding
PROBLEM STATEMENT:
(Proposition for the proposed
research)
Poor knowledge
management in public
project management
organisations
Lack of values for
knowledge sharing
Poor communication &
interpersonal skills
Rigid & hierarchical
organization structure
Lack of clear & concise
knowledge management
strategy
Misalignment between
the knowledge
management & the
organisation’s strategy
Dysfunctional
organisational culture
Lack of top
management support
and commitment
Lack of rewards and
recognition system
Lack of performance
measurement
Inadequate IT systems
and processes
Lack of training
Lack of security
Fig. 2

16. (b) Objective(s) of the Research
Objektif Penyelidikan
(Drawing from the problem statement highlighted in Figure 2)
This study embarks on the following objective:
1) To critically investigate the current concepts, theories and frameworks of knowledge
management which are applicable for public project management organisations
2) To investigate the issues and challenges confronting public project management organisations
in developing and implementing knowledge management
3) To establish a conceptual knowledge management framework for public project management
organisations
4) To validate the conceptual knowledge management framework developed for public project
management organisations
(c) Methodology
Kaedah penyelidikan
Please state in the form / Sila nyatakan di borang ini
1. Description of Methodology
The study will be carried out using the mixed method approach, comprising of quantitative and
qualitative methods:
Research Objective
Research Methodology
Method Data Collection Analysis
1. To critically investigate the
current concepts, theories
and frameworks of
knowledge management
which are applicable for
public project management
organisations
Document Analysis
Questionnaires
Semi structured
interview
Books, Journals,
Reports
Chief Knowledge
Officers/Knowledge
Managers in Public
Project Management
Organisations
Critical Analysis
SPSS/Rasch
Atlas.TI
2. To investigate the issues
and challenges confronting
public project management
organisations in developing
and implementing
knowledge management
(based on the themes of the
six constructs)
Document Analysis
Questionnaires
Semi structured
interview
Books, Journals,
Reports
Chief Knowledge
Officers/Knowledge
Managers in Public
Project Management
Organisations
Critical Analysis
SPSS/Rasch
Atlas.TI
3. To establish a conceptual
knowledge management
framework for public project
management organisations
Development of
Research Hypothesis
Expert panels Atlas.TI

17. 4. To validate the conceptual
knowledge management
framework developed for
public project management
organisations
Testing of Research
Hypothesis
Expert panels Atlas.TI
2. Flow Chart of Research Activities (Please refer to Appendix)
3. Gantt Chart of Research Activities (Please refer to Appendix)
4. Milestones and Dates (Please refer to Appendix)
(d) Expected Results/Benefit
Jangkaan Hasil Penyelidikan
1. Novel theories/New findings/Knowledge
To date there has been no study that emprically assessed the issue of slow adoption of
knowledge management implementation in the public project management organisations. This
research aims to bridge this knowledge gap. The novelty of the research is the establishment
of a new conceptual of knowledge management developed into an operational framework to
aid the strategic development and monitoring of knowledge management initiatives in public
project management organisations.
2. Research Publications
Three (3) ISI/SCOPUS/IEEE journals
a) Title : Academy of Management Learning & Education
ISSN : 1537-260X
Publisher : ACAD MANAGEMENT
IF : 2.533
b) Title : Public Management Review
ISSN : 1471-9037
Publisher : ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
IF : 1.295
c) Title : Knowledge Management Research & Practice
ISSN : 1477-8238
Publisher : PALGRAVE MACMILLAN LTD
IF : 0.855
3. Specific or Potential Applications
The findings of this research can be used as a term of reference and guidelines for the
implementation of knowledge management in public project management organisations as
part of an effort to enhance service quality and better delivery of projects to customers.

18. 4. Number of PhD and Masters (by research) Students
1 potential PhD candidate
a) Name : Khairil Hizar Md Khuzaimah
Research Title : Developing Knowledge Management Framework for Public project
management organisations
References:
1. Abdullah, & Date, H. (2009). Public Sector Knowledge Management: A Generic Framework. Public
Sector ICT Management Review, 3(1), 1–14.
2. Ajmal, M., Helo, P., & Kekäle, T. (2010). Critical factors for knowledge management in project
business. Journal of Knowledge Management, 14, 156–168. Retrieved from
http://www.emeraldinsight.com.ezaccess.library.uitm.edu.my/journals.htm?issn=1367-
3270&volume=14&issue=1&articleid=1840416&show=html
3. Al-Alawi, A. I., Al-Marzooqi, N. Y., & Mohammed, Y. F. (2007). Organizational culture and knowledge
sharing: Critical success factors. Journal of Knowledge Management, 11(2). Retrieved from
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-
34547483630&partnerID=40&md5=36555fecd04521d0702efd51d6925b18
4. Al-Athari, A., & Zairi, M. (2001). Building benchmarking competence through knowledge management
capability. An International Journal, 8(1).
5. Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Review: Knowledge management and knowledge management
systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly: Management Information
Systems, 25(1), 107–136. Retrieved from http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-
9744248703&partnerID=40&md5=2629ddd19957862f7d9e62cbf65eac82
6. Archer, N. (2006). A Classification of Communities of Practice. In Encyclopedia of Communities of
Practice in Information and Knowledge Management.
7. Bartczak, S. E., Rainer, R. K., Boulton, W. R., Oswald, S. L., & Malley, K. O. (2010). Investigating
Barriers to Knowledge Management Implementation in the U.S. Military: A Focus on Managerial
Influences. In Proceedings of the Southern Association for Information Systems Conference (pp. 23–
28).
8. Bishop, J., Bouchlaghem, D., Glass, J., & Matsumoto, I. (2008). Ensuring the effectiveness of a
knowledge management initiative. Journal of Knowledge Management, 12(4), 16–29. Retrieved from
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?issn=1367-
3270&volume=12&issue=4&articleid=1733095&show=abstract
9. Biygautane, M., & Al-Yahya, K. (2011). Knowledge Management in the UAE ’ s Public Sector : (pp. 1–
34).
10. Bresnen, M., Edelman, L., Newell, S., Scarbrough, H., & Swan, J. (2003). Social practices and the
management of knowledge in project environments. International Journal of Project Management,
21(3), 157–166. doi:10.1016/S0263-7863(02)00090-X
11. Chan, C. C. A., & Scott-Ladd, B. (2004). Organisational learning: Some considerations for human
resource practitioners. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 42(3), 336–347. Retrieved from
http://apj.sagepub.com/content/42/3/336.abstract
12. Chawla, D., & Joshi, H. (2010). Knowledge management initiatives in Indian public and private sector
organizations. Journal of Knowledge Management, 14, 811–827.
13. Chong, S. C., Salleh, K., Ahmad, S. N. S., & Sharifuddin, S.-I. S. O. (2011). KM implementation in a
public sector accounting organization: an empirical investigation. Journal of Knowledge Management,
15(3), 497–512. doi:10.1108/13673271111137457

19. 14. Chua, A., & Lam, W. (2005). Why KM projects fail: a multi-case analysis. Journal of Knowledge
Management, 9(3), 6–17. doi:10.1108/13673270510602737
15. Coakes, E., Amar, A. D., & Granados, M. L. (2010). Knowledge management, strategy, and
technology: a global snapshot. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 23(3), 282–304.
doi:10.1108/17410391011036076
16. Coetzee, J. C., Beek, W. S. B. Van, & Buys, A. (2012). A practical knowledge management framework
within the pyrometallurgical industry. The Journal of The Southern African Institute of Mining and
Metallurgy, 112(July), 621–630.
17. Cong, X., Li-Hua, R., & Stonehouse, G. (2007). Knowledge management in the Chinese public sector:
empirical investigation. Journal of Technology Management in China, 2(3), 250–263.
doi:10.1108/17468770710825188
18. Cong, X., & Pandya, K. V. (2003). Issues of Knowledge Management in the Public Sector. Electronic
Journal of Knowledge Management.
19. Conley, C. A., & Wei, Z. (2009). Factors Critical to Knowledge Management Success. Advances in
Developing Human Resources, 11(3), 334–348. Retrieved from
http://adh.sagepub.com/content/11/3/334.abstract
20. Droege, S. B. ., & Hoobler, J. M. (2003). Employee turnover and tacit knowledge diffusion: a network
perspective. Journal of Managerial Issues, 15(1), 50–64. Retrieved from
www.jstor.org/stable/40604414?
21. Durst, S., & Edvardsson, I. R. (2012). Knowledge management in SMEs : a literature review. Journal
of Knowledge Management, 16(6), 879–9903. doi:10.1108/13673271211276173
22. Egbu, C. O. (2004). Managing knowledge and intellectual capital for improved organizational
innovations in the construction industry: an examination of critical success factors. Engineering,
Construction and Architectural Management, 11(5), 301–315. doi:10.1108/09699980410558494
23. Esterhuizen, D., Schutte, C., & Du Toit, A. (2012). A knowledge management framework to grow
innovation capability maturity. SA Journal of Information Management, 14(1), 1–10.
doi:10.4102/sajim.v14i1.495
24. Garavan, T. N., Carbery, R., & Murphy, E. (2007). Managing intentionally created communities of
practice for knowledge sourcing across organisational boundaries: Insights on the role of the CoP
manager. The Learning Organization, 14(1), 34–49. doi:10.1108/09696470710718339
25. Goh, A. L. S. (2005). Harnessing knowledge for innovation: an integrated management framework.
Journal of Knowledge Management, 9(4), 6–18. doi:10.1108/13673270510610297
26. Grossman, J. (2013). The Web Won’t Be Safe or Secure until We Break It. Communications of the
ACM, 56(1), 10. doi:10.1145/2390756.2390758
27. Hassan, P.F. (2011) “The achievements of CIMP, Personal interview 12 June 2011, Kuala Lumpur
28. Holsapple, C. W., & Joshi, K. D. (2000). An investigation of factors that influence the management of
knowledge in organizations. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9, 235–261.
29. Hüttenegger, G. (2003). Knowledge Management System Building Blocks. Electronic Journal on
Knowledge Management, 1(2), 65–76.
30. Jarrar, Y. F. (2002). Knowledge management: learning for organisational experience. Managerial
Auditing Journal, 17(6), 322–328. doi:10.1108/02686900210434104
31. Jasimuddin, S. M. (2008). A holistic view of knowledge management strategy. Journal of Knowledge
Management, 12(2), 57–66.
32. Kang, S.-W., & Kim, S.-W. (2010). Integrative framework on knowledge management and new product

20. development. Asian Journal on Quality, 11(2), 157–164. doi:10.1108/15982681011075961
33. Karadsheh, L., Mansour, E., Alhawari, S., Azar, G., & El-Bathy, N. (2009). A Theoretical Framework for
Knowledge Management Process : Towards Improving Knowledge Performance. Communications of
the IBIMA, 7.
34. Lai, H. (2000). Knowledge Management : A Review of Theoretical Frameworks and Industrial Cases.
In 33rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (Vol. 00, pp. 1–10).
35. Lin, H.-F. (2007). Knowledge sharing and firm innovation capability: an empirical study. International
Journal of Manpower, 28(3/4), 315–332. doi:10.1108/01437720710755272
36. Luen, T. W., & Al-Hawamdeh, S. (2001). Knowledge management in the public sector: principles and
practices in police work. Journal of Information Science, 27(5), 311–318.
doi:10.1177/016555150102700502
37. MAMPU. (2010). Knowledge Management Blueprint.
38. Mansour, E., & Alhawari, S. (2011). Development of Conceptual Framework for Knowledge
Management Process *. Journal of Modern Accounting and Auditing, 7(8), 864–877.
39. McDermott, R., & O’Dell, C. (2001). Overcoming cultural barriers to sharing knowledge. Journal of
Knowledge Management, 5, 76–85.
40. Oluikpe, P. (2012). Developing a corporate knowledge management strategy. Journal of Knowledge
Management, 16(6). doi:10.1108/13673271211276164
41. Plessis, M. du. (2007). Knowledge management: what makes complex implementations successful?
Journal of Knowledge Management, 11, 91–101. Retrieved from
http://www.emeraldinsight.com.ezaccess.library.uitm.edu.my/journals.htm?issn=1367-
3270&volume=11&issue=2&articleid=1599332
42. Riege, A. (2005). Three-dozen knowledge-sharing barriers managers must consider. Journal of
Knowledge Management, 9(3), 18–35. doi:10.1108/13673270510602746
43. Riege, A., & Lindsay, N. (2006). Knowledge management in the public sector : stakeholder
partnerships in the public policy development. Journal of Knowledge Management, 10(3), 24–39.
doi:10.1108/13673270610670830
44. Robinson, H. S., Carrillo, P. M., Anumba, C. J., & Al-Ghassani, A. M. (2005). Knowledge management
practices in large construction organisations. (C. J. Anumba & P. Carrillo, Eds.)Engineering,
Construction and Architectural Management, 12(5), 431–445. doi:10.1108/09699980510627135
45. Salleh, K., & Ahmad, S. N. S. (2009). Knowledge Management in Electronic Government The
Organisational Readiness of Local Authorities in Malaysia.pdf . Public Sector ICT Management , 3(1).
46. Sandhu, M. S., Jain, K. K., & Ahmad, I. U. K. B. (2011). Knowledge sharing among public sector
employees: Evidence from Malaysia. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 24(3), 206–
226. doi:10.1108/09513551111121347
47. Seba, I., & Rowley, J. (2010). Knowledge management in UK police forces. Journal of Knowledge
Management, 14, 611–626. Retrieved from
http://www.emeraldinsight.com.ezaccess.library.uitm.edu.my/journals.htm?issn=1367-
3270&volume=14&issue=4&articleid=1871164&show=html
48. Skyrme, D., & Amidon, D. (1997). The Knowledge Agenda. Journal of Knowledge Management, 1(1),
27–37. Retrieved from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?issn=1367-
3270&volume=1&issue=1&articleid=883616&show=abstract
49. Sung Jun, J., & Joo, B.-K. (2011). Knowledge Sharing: The Influences of Learning Organization
Culture, Organizational Commitment, and Organizational Citizenship Behaviors. Journal of Leadership

21. & Organizational Studies, 18(3), 353–364. Retrieved from
http://jlo.sagepub.com/content/18/3/353.abstract
50. Syed-Ikhsan, S. O. S. Bin, & Rowland, F. (2004a). Benchmarking knowledge management in a public
organisation in Malaysia. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 11(3), 238–266.
doi:10.1108/14635770410538745
51. Syed-Ikhsan, S. O. S., & Rowland, F. (2004b). Knowledge management in a public organization: a
study on the relationship between organizational elements and the performance of knowledge transfer.
Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(2), 95–111. doi:10.1108/13673270410529145
52. Talisayon, S. (2013). Knowledge Management for the Public Sector (pp. 1 – 94). Capstone.
53. Wiig, K. M. (2002). Knowledge management in public administration. Journal of Knowledge
Management, 6(3), 224–239. doi:10.1108/13673270210434331
54. Wong, K. Y. (2005). Critical success factors for implementing knowledge management in small and
medium enterprises. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 105(3), 261–279. Retrieved from
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1463424&show=html
55. Yao, L. J., Kam, T. H. Y., & Chan, S. H. (2007). Knowledge sharing in Asian public administration
sector: the case of Hong Kong. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 20(1), 51–69.
doi:10.1108/17410390710717138
56. Yuen, Y. H. (2007). Overview of Knowledge Management in the Public Sector (pp. 1–16).
D
ACCESS TO EQUIPMENT AND MATERIAL / KEMUDAHAN SEDIA ADA UNTUK KEGUNAAN
BAGI PENYELIDIKAN INI
Equipment
Peralatan
Location
Tempat
Example / Contoh:
HRTEM
XRD
UiTM
UKM

22. E BUDGET /BELANJAWAN
Please indicate your estimated budget for this research and details of expenditure according to the
guidelines attached.
Sila nyatakan anggaran bajet bagi cadangan penyelidikan ini dan berikan butir – butir perbelanjaan lengkap
dengan berpandukan kepada garis panduan yang dilampirkan.
Budget details
Butiran belanjawan
Amount requested by applicant
Jumlah yang dipohon
oleh pemohon
Amount approved by VC/Dep.VC
(R&D)/Director of RMC
Jumlah yang diluluskan oleh Naib
Canselor/ TNC (P&I)/Pengarah
RMC
Year 1
Tahun 1
(RM)
Year 2
Tahun 2
(RM)
Year 3
Tahun 3
(RM)
Total
Jumlah
(RM)
E(i) Vote 11000 -
Salary and wages
Upah dan Elaun
Untuk Pembantu
Penyelidik Siswazah
(GRA)
Please specify
Sila nyatakan secara
lengkap dengan
pecahannya sekali.
Salary for one (1) GRA @
RM2,000/month for 24
months
24,000 24,000 48,000
Please Indicate the overall
Budget
Sila nyatakan bajet secara
keseluruhan

23. Assisting in conducting:
Case studies,
document analysis,
interview and
transcribing data
Questionaire survey
and analysing data
E(ii) Vote 21000 -
Travelling and
Transportation/
Perjalanan dan
Pengangkutan
.
Please specify
Sila nyatakan secara
lengkap dengan
pecahannya sekali.
1. Local Conferences
i. International
Conference on
Human Capital and
Knowledge
Management 2013 at
Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia (3 - 4
December 2013)
2. International
Conferences
i. ICIKM 2014 :
International
Conference on
Information and
Knowledge
Management at
Barcelona, Spain (27
– 28 February 2014)
3. Travelling expenses
for case studies in
Malaysia
2,000
6,000
5,000
2,000
6,000

24. 4. Food and Lodging
5,000
3,500
3,500
10,000
7,000
Budget details
Butiran belanjawan
Amount requested by applicant
Jumlah yang dipohon
oleh pemohon
Amount approved by VC/Dep.VC
(R&D)/Director of RMC
Jumlah yang diluluskan oleh Naib
Canselor/ TNC (P&I)/Pengarah
RMC
Year 1
Tahun 1
(RM)
Year 2
Tahun 2
(RM)
Year 3
Tahun 3
(RM)
Total
Jumlah
(RM)
E(iii) Vote 24000 -
Rental
Sewaan
Please specify
Sila nyatakan secara
lengkap dengan
pecahannya sekali. NIL NIL
Please Indicate the overall
Budget
Sila nyatakan bajet secara
keseluruhan
E(iv) Vote 27000 -
Research Materials &
Supplies
Bekalan dan Bahan
Penyelidikan
Please specify
Sila nyatakan secara
lengkap dengan
pecahannya sekali.
1. Stationaries
2. Printing and Binding
3,000
3,000
3,000
3,000
6,000
6,000

25. 3. Reference Books
4. Distribution of
questionaires and
related expenses
3,000
6,000
3,000
6,000
6,000
12,000
E(v) Vote 28000 -
Maintenance and Minor
Repair Services
Baik pulih kecil dan
ubahsuai
Please specify
Sila nyatakan secara
lengkap dengan
pecahannya sekali. NIL NIL
E(vi) Vote 29000 -
Professional Services
Perkhidmatan Ikhtisas
Please specify
Sila nyatakan secara
lengkap dengan
pecahannya sekali.
1. Professional
services
i. Statistician and Copy
Editor
2. Honorarium
3. ATLAS.ti course
2,000
2,000
4,000
2,000
4,000
4,000
2,000
Please Indicate the overall
Budget
Sila nyatakan bajet secara
keseluruhan
E(vii) Vote 35000 -
Accessories and
Equipment
Aksesori dan Peralatan

26. Please specify
Sila nyatakan secara
lengkap dengan
pecahannya sekali. NIL NIL
TOTAL AMOUNT
JUMLAH BESAR
113,000
F Declaration by applicant / Akuan Pemohon
(Please tick ( √ )): / (Sila tanda ( √ )):

27. I hereby declare that:
Saya dengan ini mengaku bahawa:
1. All information stated here are accurate, KPT and IPT has right to reject or to cancel the offer
without prior notice if there is any inaccurate information given.
Semua maklumat yang diisi adalah benar, KPT dan IPT berhak menolak permohonan atau
membatalkan tawaran pada bila-bila masa sekiranya keterangan yang dikemukakan adalah tidak
benar.
2. Application of this fundamental research is presented for the Fundemental Research Grant
Scheme (FRGS).
Permohonan projek penyelidikan ini dikemukakan untuk memohon peruntukan di bawah Geran
Penyelidikan Fundamental IPT.
3. Application of this fundamental research is also presented for the other reasearch grant/s
(grant’s name and total amount)
Permohonan projek penyelidikan ini juga dikemukakan untuk memohon peruntukan geran
penyelidikan dari (nama geran dan jumlah dana)____________________________________
Date : Applicant’s Signature :
Tarikh : Tandatangan Pemohon : ___________________________
G Recommended by Vice Chancellor/Deputy Vice Chancellor (Research and Innovation)/Director of
Research Management Center
Perakuan Naib Canselor/Timbalan Naib Canselor(P & I)/Pengarah Pusat Pengurusan Penyelidikan

28. Please tick ( √ )
Sila tandakan ( √ )
Recommended:
Diperakukan:
A. Highly Recommended
Sangat Disokong
B. Recommended
Disokong
C. Not Recommended (Please specify reason)
Tidak Disokong (Sila Nyatakan Sebab)
Comments:
Ulasan:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Signature:
Nama: Tandatangan:
Date:
Tarikh:
Note: APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED WILL BE TREATED IN FULL CONFIDENCE. THE DECISION OF THE
FUNDAMENTAL RESEARCH GRANT SCHEME MAIN COMMITTEE MOHE IS FINAL.
Semua permohonan dianggap sulit. Keputusan Jawatankuasa Induk Skim Geran Penyelidikan Fundamental KPT
adalah MUKTAMAD.