Dimensions and Components of Knowledge Auditing in Iranian University Libraries

This study aimed to identify the dimensions and indicators of knowledge auditing in academic libraries. The present study was applied in terms of purpose and was performed by the Delphi method and qualitative approach. Participants in the present study included professors and experts in knowledge management and information science. By purposive sampling method at first, two or three experts in knowledge management and information science were identified and introduced by other people based on the snowball method and a sample size of twenty people was selected. In this study, Kendall and binomial tests have been used to analyze the data obtained from the first and second rounds of Delphi. Fourteen factors were identified as factors involved in influencing knowledge audit based on the research findings in knowledge audit, which are: organizational perspective and goals of data analysis and knowledge information, measurement of explicit and implicit knowledge, drawing Knowledge flow map, identifying strategic elements of the organization, analyzing the gap between existing and desirable knowledge, preparing the organization, identifying the knowledge audit process, forming a knowledge audit working group, analyzing knowledge flow, identifying valuable assets of the organization, evaluating information, measuring current knowledge health And analysis of knowledge application. Findings showed that the priority index in conducting research, educational, executive projects, etc., had the highest average (4.01), and the index of knowledge resources had the lowest average (1.25). Also, the value of the Kendall coefficient for all factors considered except the factors of vision and organizational goals and identification of strategic elements of the organization is more than 0.7 or very close to it, which indicates the consensus of experts.The level of significance for the Kendall coordination coefficient in most factors is more than 5%, which means there is a significant agreement between experts. The results showed the use of knowledge audit components to identify better the needs of creating, organizing, sharing and using knowledge in organizations. The overall results of the research in the field of validation by experts showed that all components of knowledge auditing have been approved and none of the components have been rejected.