JEAS, Vol. 31 No.
146 (2025) pp (52-66) Journal of Economics
P-ISSN 2518-5764 - E-ISSN 2227-703X and Administrative
DOI: [Link] Sciences
Evaluation of Knowledge Management System Requirements
According to ISO 30401
Wafaa Ali Kattafa* Firas Rahim Younis
Department of Business Administration, College of Administration and Economics
University of Baghdad, Iraq
*Corresponding author
Received:23/10/2024 Accepted: 5/12/2024 Published: 1/4/2025
© 2025 The authors(s). This is an open-access article under the CC BY license
(https:/[Link]/licenses/by/4.0/).
Abstract:
This Paper assesses the knowledge management system (KMS) requirements at Al-Ameed
University concerning ISO 30401:2022. Specifically, the research aims to ascertain the degree to
which international standards have been complied with and gaps that have been identified. A case
study was conducted using field observations, interviews, and checklists to assess the institution's
compliance with the KMS framework. The level of implementation and documentation of
knowledge management processes was assessed using a seven-point scale.
The findings reveal that Al-Ameed University has severe gaps in knowledge creation, sharing,
and support for knowledge management in terms of strategic leadership. While certain elements
like availability of resources show high degrees of compliance, others like stakeholders need
assessment and continuous improvement show weaknesses. The overall degree of compliance
with the ISO 30401:2022 is 58.08%, having a gap of 41.92% to be bridged.
This study shows there is an urgent need to improve knowledge-sharing systems, strengthen
leadership engagement, and strategically align knowledge management with the university's
mission and goals. Their findings could help those academic institutions that want to improve
knowledge governance and align themselves with internationally accepted standards shaking
hands to become the key players in innovation and operational efficiencies. Future research
should investigate KMS gap closure methodologies in other advanced situations/dimensions in
higher educational settings.
Keywords: Knowledge Management System, ISO30401: 2022, Knowledge Transfer and
Development, Al-Ameed University.
JEAS, Vol. 31 No. 146 (2025) Kattafa et al.
1. Introduction:
Knowledge management is a capacity that organizations have to manage their intellectual capital,
with the primary goal of adding value to their production chain and guaranteeing them a
competitive market advantage (Oliveira et al., 2016). (Maximo et al., 2020a) have emphasized
that knowledge energizes the organization and thus has effects on its entire structure, reaching
directly to the people who have become a specific part of creating and sharing knowledge.
Knowledge management makes a difference by providing the management of knowledge
identification, creation, storage, sharing, and use processes as its main asset (Millar-Schijf et al.,
2016). Many organizations have developed systems-based information technology designed
specifically to facilitate the merging and exchange of knowledge and benefit from it (Saeed &
Khalil, 2023). Key capabilities of 21st century companies are acquiring new knowledge, applying
current knowledge, retaining current knowledge, and handling outdated or invalid knowledge
(Kudryavtsev & Sadykova, 2019). In 2018, the release of the ISO 30401 Knowledge
Management Systems Standard, a type A regulation which may serve as a basis for certification
(Pawlowsky et al., 2021). It enables organizations to identify, capture, organize, share, and utilize
knowledge to achieve their objectives (Collison et al., 2019). The purpose of this ISO
management system standard for knowledge management is to support organizations in
developing a management system that effectively promotes and enables value-creation through
knowledge (Orth et al., 2023). Knowledge has become a key resource in the contemporary
economy. To be competitive and survive in the knowledge economy, companies must be more
and more knowledge-driven (Carlucci et al., 2022). They need to nurture key capabilities such as
acquiring new knowledge, applying up-to-date knowledge, retaining current knowledge, and
handling outdated or invalid knowledge (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 2019). Regardless, the application
of standards for KM is gaining increasing attention among consultants, certification bodies, and
widely, practitioners (Maximo et al., 2020b). The studies on ISO 30401 reveal that to date the
research is still in its infancy and well-defined mainstreams have yet to emerge (Boonchan et al.,
2022). Knowledge management refers to the identification and use of collective knowledge
within the organization to help organizations compete (Mızrak & Akkartal, 2023). The
organization shall determine the knowledge necessary for the operation of its processes and to
achieve conformity of products and services. This knowledge shall be maintained and made
available to the extent necessary (Bougoulia, 2023). Knowledge Management Systems (KMSs)
have been defined as an integrated technical system that supports knowledge management
processes through acquiring, storing, applying, and sharing knowledge (Nagy, 2019). (Saeed &
Khalil, 2023) have shown that KMSs are responsible for implementing the knowledge
management strategy by activating knowledge management processes and their life cycle.
Organizations view knowledge strategically, in which their management improves their processes
and directs them to solve their challenges (Barnes, 2022). Most of these studies have dealt with
previous versions of the specification and within a limited scope of applications. Based on the
reviews, interviews, and field observations that were conducted, and also based on personal
experiences. The researchers adopted the urgent need to adopt a knowledge management system
that contributes to achieving maximum benefit from available knowledge and contributes to
enhancing academic excellence. From this standpoint, the research problem can be crystallized by
stating the extent of the availability of the requirements of the knowledge management system
according to the specification (ISO/IEC30401:2022) at Al-Ameed University. The importance of
the research extends to include important practical applications that can directly affect the
administrative and academic processes at Al-Ameed University, as well as other academic
institutions seeking to improve their knowledge management systems. In addition, the research
contributes to enhancing Al-Ameed University's ability to adapt to international standards by
providing practical recommendations for developing the knowledge management system. To
ensure compliance with the requirements of (ISO/IEC 30401:2022).
Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences 35
JEAS, Vol. 31 No. 146 (2025) Kattafa et al.
The research aims to identify the availability of knowledge management system
requirements according to the specification (ISO/IEC30401:2022) at Al-Ameed University. The
results of the field visit and interviews with specialists at Al-Ameed University regarding the
application and commitment to the international specification related to developing the
educational process and improving the level of its outputs showed an initial readiness to apply the
specification for KMSs (ISO/IEC30401:2022).
2. Literature Review and Hypothesis Development:
A study of (Mohamed et al., 2019) indicated that managing intellectual assets is a challenge faced
by many organizations in today’s business environment. However, these challenges can be
overcome by implementing the best practices for knowledge management. Document
management, training and support, knowledge creation, and knowledge capture and storage were
found to be the four best practices for knowledge management. A study conducted by (Vold et
al., 2020) summarized the practices of KMSs in higher education institutions into six conceptual
approaches to achieve the goal of knowledge management, which are a control of intellectual
assets, knowledge transfer, knowledge improvement techniques, knowledge management
training, creation and sharing of academic knowledge, and implementation of knowledge
management. A study conducted by (Hsieh et al., 2020) also indicated that KMSs have become
more important for achieving sustainable success. Therefore, knowledge-based organizations
have primarily embarked on knowledge management practices to raise the challenges of rapidly
changing markets. The results of the study conducted by (Saeed & Khalil, 2022) showed that the
overall rate achieved through analyzing and measuring the availability of KMSs requirements
according to ISO30401 in the Oil Projects Company had a percentage of 53% and an application
rate of 3, meaning that it was partially applied and fully documented, which led to a gap of 47%.
The results of the study conducted by (Hashemi et al., 2023) showed that ISO 30401 successfully
combines a variety of studies into an international working standard. The study explained how
ISO 30401 can help create value for the organization. The study also indicated that the standard
guides managers on what they should do to add value when implementing ISO 30401. A study
conducted by (Cocca et al., 2022) showed that the availability of knowledge management tools in
organizations is relatively small and does not paint a picture of maturity and completeness.
Knowledge management represents a challenge for organizations because they usually lack the
resources necessary to fully utilize their knowledge stock. In their study (Carlucci, et al., 2022)
titled “Knowledge Management Systems in the Digital Age”, they proposed a new framework for
knowledge management based on a literature review of the ISO standard for knowledge
management, where they proposed a visualization of the ISO standard for knowledge
management through some conceptual and mental maps that organize and collect the knowledge
management requirements of ISO. A study of (Carlucci et al, 2022) indicated that the knowledge
management standard gives organizations the freedom to choose the knowledge management
frameworks that they see as best suited to their needs provided that they adequately justify their
choices according to the ISO:30401 audit accreditation standards. The study conducted by
(Dneprovskaya & Shevtsova, 2023) dealt with a conceptual description of the implementation of
Knowledge Management Systems KMSs as a mechanism for the strategic development of
universities, as the study proved that the practice of Knowledge Management (KM) from all over
the world has a positive impact of KMS on the productivity of educational institutions. A study of
(Hashemi et al., 2022) showed that ISO 30401 can lead to defining a knowledge management
system framework to formulate effective strategies to enhance value creation and improve
organizational performance. A study conducted by (Safira & Andhika, 2024) aimed to measure
the level of maturity of knowledge management based on ISO 30401 and the quality management
system as a strategy to face globally competitive conditions in the future so that leaders can
develop effective strategies to reduce the loss of organizational knowledge and customer
complaints that occur due to lack of knowledge management.
Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences 35
JEAS, Vol. 31 No. 146 (2025) Kattafa et al.
3. Methodology:
The study adopted the case study approach, which included field experience, direct observation,
observations, questions, inquiries, and interviews with interested parties to reach the real data and
determine the gap between the application of the requirements of the knowledge management
system according to the international standard specification (ISO/IEC30401:2022) at Al-Ameed
University.
To provide a practical methodology for collecting and analyzing data regarding the
evaluation of the extent of application of the knowledge management system requirements
according to the international specification under study at Al-Ameed University, and to achieve
the data analysis process and obtain a higher level of accuracy. The seven-point scale was
adopted for these lists to identify the extent of compliance of the actual application of the
knowledge management system requirements at the university under study and compare them
with the requirements of the international standard specification (ISO 30401:2022), as it includes
allocating a specific weight to each item of the specification according to the level of application
and documentation of it. Table 2 shows those items and their weights, which range between full
application and documentation with a weight of 6 degrees and non-implementation and
documentation with a weight of 0 degrees.
For data analysis purposes, a seven-point scale was used in the checklists to measure the
extent of compliance of the application and actual documentation with the requirements of the
international standard (ISO/IEC30401:2022) at Al-Ameed University, and with the weights
specified for the answers to the questions included in the checklists by assigning a specific weight
to each item of the scale, as shown in Table 1. After consulting the opinions of statisticians, the
researchers intended that the number 6 would represent the highest weight on the scale, while the
number 0 would represent the lowest weight on the scale, as used in the latest studies to reveal the
gap between the knowledge management system and the requirements of the international
standard (ISO/IEC 30401:2022).
Table 1: Seven-point scale for the extent of conformity with the standard specification
No. Scale items Item weight (point)
1 Fully implemented Fully documented 6
2 Fully implemented Partially documented 5
3 Fully implemented Not documented 4
4 Partially implemented Fully documented 3
5 Partially implemented Partially documented 2
6 Partially implemented Not documented 1
7 Not implemented Not documented 0
Source: Vagias, Wade M., (2006), "Likert-type scale", Clemson International institute for
tourism, department of parks, recreation and tourism management, Clemson University, USA:
p:2.
The approximate rate of the extent of conformity and actual documentation of the business
continuity management system at Al-Ameed University as a case study was calculated in
comparison with the requirements of the specification by extracting the weighted arithmetic mean
according to the following equation:
( )
The percentage of the extent of conformity of the application and actual documentation of the
requirement with the standard specification, according to the following equation:
Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences 33
JEAS, Vol. 31 No. 146 (2025) Kattafa et al.
The highest weight in the seven-point scale is six degrees and represents the state of complete
conformity with the requirements of the standard specification.
Calculating the gap size through the following equation:
Gap size for each checklist = 1 - percentage of conformity
Representing the results with a Pareto chart
Representing the results with a Cause & Effect diagram.
Representing the results using a fishbone diagram.
4. Results:
Based on the results of the checklists conducted by the researchers, which evaluated the level of
application and documentation of the requirements of the international standard
(ISO/IEC30401:2022). The aggregated results will be displayed by calculating the weighted
arithmetic mean for each of the seven sub- and main elements of the standard, as shown in
Table2.
Table 2: Summary of the results of the level of conformity and documentation for the
requirements of the international standard specification (ISO/IEC 30401:2022) at Al-Ameed
University
Assessment grades for actual
Requirement titles according to ISO/IEC 30401:2022
application and documentation
The Requirement Degree Achieved
No Required Name Gap %
No. achieved %
Understanding the
1 1-4 5.5 %9116 %814
University and its Context
Understanding the needs
2 2-4 and expectations of 3166 %6111 %38.9
stakeholders
Defining the scope of the
3 3-4 3.3 %5515 %4415
KM system
Knowledge Management /
4 1-4-4 5 %83.3 %1617
General Item
5 2-4-4 Knowledge Development 2.5 %31.6 %68.4
Knowledge Transfer and
6 3-4-4 4 %6616 %3314
Transformation
Knowledge Management
7 4-4-4 316 %66 %46
Enablers
Knowledge Management
8 5-4 2.87 %47.6 %52.4
Culture
Leadership and
9 1-5 3.3 %55 %45
Commitment Gap
10 2-5 Policy Gap 3144 %5714 %4216
Roles, Responsibilities,
11 3-5 3175 %6215 %3715
and Authorities Gap
Actions taken to address
12 1-6 3.28 %5417 %4513
risks and opportunities
Service Management
13 2-6 Goals and Plans to 3.4 %5718 %4212
Achieve Them Gap
14 1-7 Support / Resources 5 %83.3 %16.7
15 2-7 Support / Capability 315 %5813 %4117
Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences 35
JEAS, Vol. 31 No. 146 (2025) Kattafa et al.
16 3-7 Support / Awareness 3.3 %55.5 %44.5
17 4-7 Support / Communication 2.75 %45.8 %54.2
Support / Documented
18 5-7 3.33 %55.5 % 44.5
Information Gap
19 8 Process Gap 316 %66 %46
Monitoring, Measurement,
20 1-9 Analysis, and Evaluation 2.83 %47.2 %52.8
Gap
21 2-9 Internal Control 3 %56 %56
22 3-9 Management Review 3.12 %52 %48
23 1-16 Improvement Gap 3169 %5115 %4815
24 2-16 Continuous Improvement 3 % 56 % 56
Total of achieved assessment results 84.12 1393.8 1666.2
The maximum limit for application and full
6 100 100
documentation of the requirement
Assumed total for application and full documentation 144 2466 2466
Amount of gap in application and documentation of
59.88 1666.2 1393.8
total requirements
Percentage of total results %58.68 %41.92
Source: Prepared by the researchers based on data analysis.
Analysis of the results of implementing the requirements of the international standard (ISO/IEC
30401:2022) and the application gaps Table 1 shows the final results of the checklists, where the
application and documentation rate of the requirements was achieved at 58%. The non-
application gap rate was 41.92%. This gap indicates a significant risk to the components of the
university and its colleges. As shown in Figure 2.
Degree achieved
Degree achieved
Understanding the…
Continuous Improvement 6 Understanding the needs…
Improvement Gap Defining the scope of the…
5
Management Review Knowledge Management…
4
Internal Control 3 Knowledge Development
Monitoring,… 2 Knowledge Transfer and…
1
Process Gap 0 Knowledge Management…
Support / Documented… Knowledge Management…
Support / Communication Leadership and…
Support / Awareness Policy Gap
Support / Capability Roles, Responsibilities…
Support / Resources Actions taken to address…
Service Management…
Figure 1: The total level of application and documentation of the knowledge management system
requirements according to the standard specification (ISO/IEC 30401:2022) at Al-Ameed
University
Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences 35
JEAS, Vol. 31 No. 146 (2025) Kattafa et al.
The effective analysis process relies on models and charts that help diagnose the factors
affecting various phenomena accurately and clearly. Among these tools, the Pareto chart (also
known as the ABC distribution curve) is a commonly used technique for graphically classifying
information from most to least relevant. This method aims to identify the most important
problems that deserve focus and solve them urgently.
The Pareto chart is based on the Pareto principle, also known as the 80/20 rule, which states that
80% of the results come from 20% of the causes. Therefore, this chart assists identify the few
factors that contribute significantly to causing problems, which allows for effective decisions to
be made to solve them. It helps identify the most important causes or problems that represent
most of the problems. To create a Pareto chart, there are several procedures, the most important
of which are:
1. Clearly define the problem or issue you want to research.
2. Then we collect the relevant data for each category or element.
3. The data or elements are arranged in descending order based on their contribution to the
problem. 4. Extract the adjusted percentage using the law (part/whole × 100).
5. Perform the cumulative percentage calculation, which reflects the extent to which each area
contributes to the overall problem.
6. Draw the chart. Create a vertical bar chart with categories on the horizontal axis and
frequencies or amounts on the vertical axis using a spreadsheet program or data visualization tool.
Make sure to label and measure the bars correctly.
7. Interpret and analyze: Analyze the Pareto chart to identify the “low-vitality” factors that
contribute the most to the problem. Focus on addressing these variables to have the most
significant impact on changing the situation.
Through these procedures, the results are as shown in Table 3.
Table 3: Summary of the preparation of the results of the checklists for Pareto analysis of the
results of the level of conformity and documentation for the requirements of the international
standard specification (ISO/IEC 30401:2022) at Al-Ameed University
The
Cumulative
No. Requirement Required Name Gap % Adjusted %
Percentage
No.
1 2-4-4 Knowledge Development %68.4 6.79 6.79
2 4-7 Support/Communication %54.2 5.39 12.18
Monitoring, Measurement,
3 1-9 Analysis, and Evaluation %52.8 5.25 17.43
Gap
4 5-4 KM Culture %52.4 5.21 22.64
5 2-9 Internal Control %56 4.97 27.61
6 2-16 Continuous Improvement % 56 4.97 32.58
7 1-16 Improvement Gap %4815 4.82 37146
8 3-9 Management Review %48 4.45 41.58
Actions Taken to Address
9 1-6 Risks and Opportunities %4513 4.56 46.35
Gap
Leadership and
10 1-5 %45 4.47 56.82
Commitment Gap
Defining the Scope of the
11 3-4 %4415 4.42 55.24
KM System
Support/Documented
12 5-7 % 44.5 4.42 59.66
Information Gap
Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences 35
JEAS, Vol. 31 No. 146 (2025) Kattafa et al.
13 3-7 Support/Awareness %44.5 4.42 64.68
14 2-5 Policy Gap %4216 4.23 68.31
Service Management
15 2-6 Goals and Plans to %4212 4.16 72.41
Achieve Them Gap
16 2-7 Support/Capability %4117 4.65 76.46
Knowledge Management
17 4-4-4 %46 4.11 86.57
Enablers
18 8 Process Gap %46 3.98 84.55
Understanding Stakeholder
19 2-4 %38.9 3.79 88.34
Needs and Expectations
Roles, Responsibilities and
20 3-5 %3715 3.73 91.87
Authorities Gap
Knowledge Transfer and
21 3-4-4 %33.4 3.32 95.39
Transformation
Knowledge
22 1-4-4 %1617 1.86 97.25
Management/General Item
23 1-7 Support/Resources %16.7 1.86 99.11
Understanding the
24 1-4 %8.4 6.89 166
University and its Context
Total 1666.2 %166
Source: Prepared by the researchers based on data analysis.
Through Table 3, which included restructuring the items in descending order of their size
according to the Pareto analysis procedures and the level of gaps in terms of identifying the most
influential minority, the results showed that requirement (4-4-2) represented a percentage of
68.4%, which is the gap that must be started to be reduced and is related to developing
knowledge, as this helps to achieve 6.79% of the international specification, followed by
requirement (7-4) with a percentage of 54.2%, which is support/communication, followed by
requirement (9-1) related to the monitoring, measurement, analysis, and evaluation gap with a
percentage of 52.8%, followed by requirement (4-5) with a percentage of 54.2%, which is the
knowledge management culture, and then requirements (9-2, -102) with a percentage of 50%
each. After them came the requirement (10-1) which is related to the improvement gap with a
percentage of 48.5%, followed by requirement (9-3) with a percentage of 48%, which is
represented by the management review. After them came the requirement (6-1) which is related
to the gap in the procedures taken to address risks and opportunities with a percentage of 45.3%,
followed by requirement (1-5) with a percentage of 45%, which is represented by leadership and
commitment. Then came the three requirements which are (4-3, 6-5, 7-3) with a percentage
of44.5% each. After them came the requirement (5-2) which is related to the policy gap with a
percentage of 42.6%, followed by requirement (6-2) with a percentage of 42.2%. After them
came requirement (7-2) with a percentage of 41.7%, requirements (4-4-4, 8) with a percentage of
40% each, then requirement (4-2) with a percentage of 38.9%, then requirement (5-3) with a
percentage of 37.5%, and requirement (4-4-3) with a percentage of 45.83%, then requirement (1-
17) with a percentage of 44.50%, and requirement (1-13) with a percentage of 44.45%, and after
them came requirements (9-4, 18-1) with a percentage of 33.4%, and requirements (4-4-1, and 7-
1) with a percentage of 16.7%, then the last requirement was (4-1) with a percentage of 8.4% and
related to understanding the university and its context, which obtained the lowest gap percentage.
Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences 35
JEAS, Vol. 31 No. 146 (2025) Kattafa et al.
Gap % Adjusted % Cumulative Percentage
12000.00%
10000.00%
8000.00%
6000.00%
4000.00%
2000.00%
0.00%
Leadership and…
Monitoring,…
Understanding…
Service Management…
Knowledge Management…
Knowledge Transfer and…
Support/Documented…
Knowledge…
Actions Taken to Address…
Understanding the…
Roles, Responsibilities…
Defining the Scope of the…
Policy Gap
Support/Capability
Knowledge Development
KM Culture
Internal Control
Improvement Gap
Management Review
Process Gap
Support/Awareness
Support/Resources
Support/Communication
Continuous Improvement
Figure 2: Pareto analysis of the level of gaps in terms of identifying the most influential minority
at Al-Ameed University
The horizontal line that divides the chart into two parts at a ratio of 80:20 shows the
contribution of each requirement its role in the weakness of the knowledge management system at
Al-Ameed University and the overall impact of the specification requirements. This analysis can
be used in the process of improving the ability of Al-Ameed University to implement the
knowledge management system according to the international standard specification
(ISO/IEC30401:2022) as shown in Figure 2. It can also be noted from the same table that the
highest gap is the requirement (knowledge development) (4-4-2) at a rate of 68.4% compared to
the total gaps in the requirements, the adjusted percentage (6.79) and ends with the requirement
(understanding the university and its context) at a rate of 8.4%. The adjusted percentage (0.83%).
Figure 3 presents an Ishikawa diagram providing a detailed explanation of the gaps for
each main and sub-requirement in the implementation and documentation of the international
standard requirements (ISO/IEC 30401:2022) in general, as well as the implementation and
documentation gaps for all the standard requirements within the knowledge management system
at Al-Ameed University.
Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences 56
JEAS, Vol. 31 No. 146 (2025) Kattafa et al.
Figure 3: The overall level of gaps in the requirements of the Knowledge Management System
according to the International Standard (ISO/IEC 30401:2022) at Al-Ameed University.
The source: Prepared by the researchers based on data analysis.
It is observed from Figure 4 that the percentage of gaps for each requirement reveals that
the requirement (4-4-2) has the highest gap at 68.4%, representing the requirement with the most
significant gap that needs to be addressed. Conversely, the requirement (4-1) has the lowest gap
at 8.9%. The total of these gaps represents the overall gap in the implementation and
documentation level of the Knowledge Management System according to the International
Standard (ISO/IEC 30401:2022).
The primary and secondary potential causes for the weak performance of the requirements
compared to the International Standard (ISO/IEC 30401:2022) are illustrated in Table4.
Table 4: Possible main and secondary reasons for the gap in the international standard (ISO/IEC
30401:2022)
No Main reasons Secondary causes
Weak understanding of stakeholders' needs
and expectations
Weakness in defining the scope of the
knowledge management system
Weakness in the context of university Weakness in developing, transferring, and
1
work transforming knowledge
Weakness in knowledge management
enablers
Weakness in knowledge management
culture
Weak leadership and commitment
2 Weakness in leadership Weak knowledge management policies
Weak roles, responsibilities, and authorities
Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences 56
JEAS, Vol. 31 No. 146 (2025) Kattafa et al.
Procedures to address risks and
opportunities
Weakness in not setting information
3 Weakness in planning security objectives and plans to achieve
them
Weakness in adopting procedures to target
risks and opportunities
Weakness in providing resources
Weakness in capacity and efficiency
Weakness in awareness and education
4 Weakness in support Weakness in communication and contacts
Weakness in documented information in
terms of creation, updating, control, and
validity
Weakness in planning, implementing, and
monitoring operations
Weakness in controlling planned changes
5 Weakness in operations
Weakness in reviewing external sources
Monitoring, measuring, analyzing, and
evaluating
Weakness in the internal audit process in
terms of planning, implementation, risk
6 Weakness in performance evaluation
assessment, and treatment.
Weakness in management review
Poor corrective actions for non-
conformities
7 Weakness in improvement
Poor training of staff
Poor continuous improvement policy
Source: Prepared by the researchers.
Table 4 shows some of the main and secondary reasons for the gap in the non-application and
documentation of the requirements of the international standard (ISO/IEC30401:2022), which
start from the context of understanding the university as a system and end with continuous
improvement.
Figure 5 also illustrates some of the primary and secondary causes of the gap in the
implementation and documentation of the requirements of the International Standard (ISO/IEC
30401:2022).
Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences 56
JEAS, Vol. 31 No. 146 (2025) Kattafa et al.
Figure 5: Some of the main and secondary reasons for the gap in the non-application and
documentation of the requirements of the international standard (ISO/IEC 30401:2022).
Source: Prepared by the researchers.
5. Conclusion:
Based on the results of the current research, the conclusions drawn from the results of the
practical aspect can be determined, which are as follows: The results of the field visits and
interviews with specialists at Al-Ameed University regarding the application and commitment to
the international specification related to developing the educational process and improving the
level of its outputs showed an initial readiness to apply the specification for KMSs
(ISO/IEC30401:2022). Al-Ameed University generally suffers from a weak understanding of the
needs and expectations of stakeholders, despite an acceptable level of awareness and
understanding of the university's work context. Evidence of weak understanding includes not
adequately meeting the needs of stakeholders such as student complaints about the lack of
services or the quality of educational materials. Faculty members' dissatisfaction with the work
environment or professional development opportunities. Criticism from external parties, such as
funding agencies or the local community. It was found that there were fundamental gaps in the
analysis of the requirements of the knowledge management system at the university under study,
which negatively affected the effectiveness of the system's implementation and the achievement
of its objectives. These gaps include weak analysis of knowledge transfer channels, the absence
of an evaluation of management support for the knowledge management system, and failure to
take into account compatibility with the strategy and organizational structure. In addition, the
relevant areas and contexts were not adequately analyzed, such as the needs of faculty and
students in terms of knowledge sharing and learning processes, the university’s lack of analysis of
the requirements and characteristics of different disciplines, and finally, the absence of an
assessment of the cultural conditions within the university, which may have hindered the
acceptance of the system by faculty and students.
Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences 55
JEAS, Vol. 31 No. 146 (2025) Kattafa et al.
Knowledge management practices at Al-Ameed University suffer from fundamental
gaps, despite the clear need to define the scope of the knowledge management system. These
gaps are represented by the lack of analysis of knowledge transfer channels at Al-Ameed
University, as the communication channels between faculty members were not adequately
evaluated, as well as the knowledge exchange channels between students, and also the channels
for accessing educational resources. The university also does not adequately analyze the
management’s support for the knowledge management system, as the management’s commitment
to implementing the system is not accurately evaluated. The necessary resources are not allocated
appropriately. Likewise, there is a lack of training and support required for employees.
Al-Ameed University should begin implementing the plan to reduce the gaps in all
instances of non-conformity and documentation. The process should start with the requirement
that it recorded the highest gap of 68.4% and conclude with the one with the lowest gap, which is
8.4% and deemed of lesser importance. This process should be carried out in phases within a
specified timeframe.
As for answering the second question, which was: "What is the size of the gap between
the actual state of the knowledge management system at Al-Ameed University and the
application of the knowledge management system according to the International Standard
(ISO/IEC 30401:2022)?" The answer, based on the results of the compliance checklists for the 24
standard requirements, showed a compliance rate of 58.08% and a non-compliance rate of
41.92%.
Authors Declaration:
Conflicts of Interest: None
-We Hereby Confirm That All The Figures and Tables In The Manuscript Are Mine and Ours.
Besides, The Figures and Images, which are Not Mine, Have Been Permitted Republication and
Attached to The Manuscript.
- Ethical Clearance: The Research Was Approved by The Local Ethical Committee in The
University.
References:
Barnes, S. (2022). How radical KM is knowledge management: Referencing ISO knowledge
management systems requirements standard 30401. Business Information Review, 39(2),
51–55.
Boonchan, G., Sinthamrongruk, T., & Khamaksorn, A. (2022). Knowledge Management in the
Royal Thai Army: ISO30401: 2018 Knowledge Management Systems Perspective. 2022
Joint International Conference on Digital Arts, Media and Technology with ECTI Northern
Section Conference on Electrical, Electronics, Computer and Telecommunications
Engineering (ECTI DAMT & NCON), 151–156.
Bougoulia, E. (2023). Knowledge management maturity assessment frameworks: A holistic
approach and a proposal for a novel integrated KMM model.
Carlucci, D., Kudryavtsev, D., Santarsiero, F., Lagrutta, R., & Garavelli, A. C. (2022). The ISO
30401 Knowledge Management Systems: a new frame for managing knowledge.
Conceptualisation and practice. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 20(6), 975–
986.
Carlucci, D., Kudryavtsev, D. V, & Bratianu, C. (2022). Guest editorial “Knowledge
management systems in the digital age.” In Knowledge management research & practice
(Vol. 20, Issue 6, pp. 793–796). Taylor & Francis.
Cocca, P., Schiuma, G., Viscardi, M., & Floreani, F. (2022). Knowledge management system
requirements to support Engineering-To-Order manufacturing of SMEs. Knowledge
Management Research & Practice, 20(6), 814–827.
Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences 55
JEAS, Vol. 31 No. 146 (2025) Kattafa et al.
Collison, C. J., Corney, P. J., & Eng, P. L. (2019). The KM cookbook: Stories and strategies for
organisations exploring knowledge management standard ISO30401. Facet Publishing.
Dneprovskaya, N. V, & Shevtsova, I. V. (2023). A knowledge management system in the
strategic development of universities. Бизнес-Информатика, 17(2 (eng)), 20–40.
Hashemi, H., Aligholi, S., & Mohammad, N. (2023). Required factors for Implementing of
Knowledge Management System Based on ISO 30401: Operational Approach. Journal of
Knowledge Retrieval and Semantic Systems, 10(36), 189–223.
Hashemi, H., Roshan, S. A. Q., Salarzahi, H., & Yaghoubi, N. M. (2022). ISO 30401 Validation
as a New Basis in Research and Value Creation of the Knowledge Management. Scientific
Journal of Strategic Management of Organizational Knowledge, 5(1), 1-42.
Hsieh, P. J., Lin, C., & Chang, S. (2020). The evolution of knowledge navigator model: the
construction and application of KNM 2.0. Expert Systems with Applications, 148, 113209.
Kudryavtsev, D., & Sadykova, D. (2019). Towards architecting a knowledge management
system: Requirements for an ISO compliant framework. The Practice of Enterprise
Modeling: 12th IFIP Working Conference, PoEM 2019, Luxembourg, Luxembourg,
November 27–29, 2019, Proceedings 12, 36–50.
Maximo, E. Z., Pereira, R., Malvestiti, R., & de Souza, J. A. (2020a). ISO 30401: The
standardization of knowledge. International Journal of Development Research, 10(06),
37155–37159.
Maximo, E. Z., Pereira, R., Malvestiti, R., & de Souza, J. A. (2020b). ISO 30401: The
standardization of knowledge. International Journal of Development Research, 10(06),
37155–37159.
Millar-Schijf, C. C. J. M., Lockett, M., & Mahon, J. F. (2016). Knowledge intensive
organisations: on the frontiers of knowledge management: Guest editorial. Journal of
Knowledge Management, 20(5), 845–857.
Mızrak, F., & Akkartal, G. R. (2023). Strategic management of digital transformation processes
in the aviation industry: Case of Istanbul Airport. In Cases on Enhancing Business
Sustainability Through Knowledge Management Systems (pp. 154–177). IGI Global.
Mohamed, H. A. E., Elhosseiney, O., & Elyamany, A. (2019). Knowledge Management:
Investigating Egyptian Construction Companies Best Practices. International Journal of
Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), 10(10), 244–258.
Nagy. E. S. (2019). Knowledge management systems application experiences and practices in
academic libraries: an exploratory study with a proposed framework for implementation.
Scientific Journal of Libraries, Documents and Information, 3(6), 109–149.
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (2019). The wise company: How companies create continuous
innovation. Oxford University Press.
Oliveira, D., Nascimento, D., & Dalkir, K. (2016). The evolution of the intellectual capital
concept and measurement. Ciência Da Informação, 45(3).
Orth, R., Will, M., Pavim, A. X., de Oliveira Gomes, J., & da Costa, C. C. F. (2023). Towards A
Knowledge Management Standard For The Netwok Of The Senai Innovation Institutes.
Anais Do Congresso Internacional de Conhecimento e Inovação–Ciki.
Pawlowsky, P., Pflugfelder, N. S., & Wagner, M. H. (2021). The ISO 30401 knowledge
management systems standard–a new framework for value creation and research? Journal
of Intellectual Capital, 22(3), 506–527.
Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences 53
JEAS, Vol. 31 No. 146 (2025) Kattafa et al.
Saeed, S. J. , &, & Khalil, A. S. (2022). Analysis of the Requirements of Knowledge
Management Systems According to the Specification ISO 30401:2018 in the Oil Projects
Company. Journal of Techniques, 4(4), 191–196.
Saeed, S. J., & Khalil, A. P. D. A. S. (2023). Effect Knowledge Management Systems According
to the Specification ISO 30401: 2018 in the participation of employees in decision-making
Analytical research in the Oil Projects Company in Iraq. Al-Kut University College Journal,
8(1).
Saeed. S. J, & Khalil. A. S. (2023). The possibility of applying knowledge management
systems according to Specification ISO 30401:2018 And its role in the transparency of
decisions Analytical study in the Oil Projects Company. Al-Maamoun College Journal,
139, 139–158.
Safira, N., & Andhika, R. (2024). Analysis Of Knowledge Management Maturity Level Based On
ISO 30401 And Quality Management System To Reduce The Number Customer
Complaints. International Journal of Science, Technology & Management, 5(3), 702–708.
Vold, T., Haave, H., & Kaloudis, A. (2020). On work relevance of adult education: A case study
narrative. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 18(2), pp105-120.
Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences 55