Perceptions of knowledge management capacity within extension services: an exploratory factor analysis approach

ABSTRACT

Purpose

The purpose was to analyze perceptions of knowledge management capacity in extension networks using an exploratory factor analysis approach.

Design/methodology/approach

The knowledge management content domain was analyzed for content validity, response process validity, internal structure validity, and consequential validity. A pilot version of an instrument was administered to extension network members (n = 122) associated with the Global Forum for Rural Advisory Services. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and measures of correlation and reliability were performed to determine the structure and internal consistency of the scale.

Findings

The observed structure was similar to the hypothesized structure. EFA indicates further factor analyses should be performed on the aggregate scale and proposed subscales.

Practical Implications

The resulting scale has the potential to serve as the basis for a reliable instrument for establishing perceptions of knowledge management capacity, supplementing needs assessment strategies, and informing organizational practices and policy which maximize these capacities in extension services.

Theoretical Implications

The resulting scale advances the activity theory framework by conceptualizing dimensions of knowledge management that facilitate development via social interaction.

Originality/Value

While various studies have been conducted to analyze the knowledge management capacities of international extension networks, the current study introduces preliminary results of an instrument to discretely quantify perceptions of knowledge management capacity in extension services.

KEYWORDS:

• knowledge management
• scale development
• rural advisory services
• capacity evaluation
• international extension

Disclosure statement

Two of the authors of this publication served as consultants to GFRAS, and a third author was employed by GFRAS at the time the data were collected. Furthermore, this work was undertaken as part of the CGIAR Research Program on Policies, Institutions, and Markets (PIM), led by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). The opinions expressed here belong to the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of PIM or CGIAR. We have disclosed these interests fully to Taylor & Francis and have in place an approved plan for managing any potential conflicts arising from this arrangement.

Additional information

Funding

The research being reported in this publication was financially supported by the Global Forum for Rural Advisory Services (GFRAS).

Notes on contributors

Kevan W. Lamm

Kevan W. Lamm, Ph.D., is an assistant professor in the Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education, and Communication at the University of Georgia, Athens, GA.

Alexa J. Lamm

Alexa J. Lamm, Ph.D., is an associate professor in the Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education, and Communication at the University of Georgia, Athens, GA.

Kristin Davis

Kristin Davis, Ph.D., is a senior research fellow at the International Food Policy Research Institute, Pretoria, South Africa.

Catherine E. Sanders

Catherine E. Sanders is a doctoral student in the Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education, and Communication at the University of Georgia, Athens, GA.

Alyssa Powell

Alyssa Powell is a graduate student in the Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education, and Communication at the University of Georgia, Athens, GA.