正修科技大学工业工程与管理系-课件.ppt

Abstract The case company G is a Taiwan firm with more than USD 250 million turnovers and over 1250 employees worldwide. But, company G confronted much trouble in selecting a fitting KM strategy that involved several complex factors systematically, such as: the purposes, the condition of resources and capabilities, and even the preferences of company. In this research, an empirical study is presented to illustrate the application of the proposed method for evaluating and selecting a favorable KM strategy. The proposed method Step 1: Defining the decision goals - to select a favorable KM strategy Step 2: Establishing evaluation clusters - three primary purposes of KM six important factors for evaluating KM strategies three styles of KM strategies Step 3: Applying an ANP model ANP handles dependence within a cluster (inner dependence) and among different clusters (outer dependence). Secondly, the ANP is a nonlinear structure, while the AHP is hierarchical and linear with a goal at the top level and the alternatives in the bottom level. In the feedback system model, evaluation clusters link one by one in turn as a network system. it is usually hard to obviate the possibility of interactions within the sub-criteria cluster. The looped arc signifies the inner dependences. Step 4: Selecting the optimal solution The unweighted supermatrix W (Fig. 2) contains the local priorities derived from the pairwise comparisons throughout the network. To derive the overall priorities of elements, we need to multiply submatrices numerous times in turn, until the columns stabilize and become identical in each block of submatrices. The overall normalized priorities were obtained: WC = (C1, C2, C3) = (0.337, 0.318, 0.345), WS = (S1, S2, S3, S4, S5, S6) = (0.173, 0.178, 0.176, 0.175, 0.154, 0.144), WA = (A1, A2, A3) = (0.291, 0.350, 0.360). Discussion Each KM strategy emphasizes its own specific KM purpose: strategy A1 cast highlight at the activating information (C1) of 0.425