The Effect of Knowledge Management Processes on Organizational Business Processes ’ and Employees ’ Benefits in an Academic Institution ' s Portal Environment

The current study aims at assessing the functional relationships between knowledge management processes and both organizational business processes’ and employees’ benefits. The assessment is taking place within an academic institution's portal environment. The study particularly investigates the effect of knowledge discovery, knowledge capture, knowledge sharing and knowledge application on business processes’ effectiveness, efficiency, and innovation; and employees’ learning, adaptability, and job satisfaction. Statistical analysis is performed using the PLS method on a structural equations framework.Consistent with previous research, knowledge sharing produces the highest effect on organizational business processes’ and employees’ benefits.


Introduction
Data and information are different from knowledge although still interrelated.On one hand, data represent raw numbers or words about facts, observations, or perceptions.On one hand, information is processing data of relevance and purpose.On the other hand, knowledge is roughly, useful or actionable information.Knowledge is information that's relevant to a decision.It is good explanations, and it is solutions (even if partial) to problems people had.
Knowledge has become one of the most highly valued commodities in the modern economy.Further, knowledge is considered the principal tool of competitiveness and innovation in the The use of KMS to support KM processes enables KM to achieve its goals.KMS improve effectiveness and efficiency of organizational KM.Several empirical studies in different countries provided evidence on the significance of KM and KMS such as Gold et al. (2001), and Jennex (2008) in the US, Chong (2006) in Malaysia, Liu and Tsai (2007) and Wu and Wang (2006) in Taiwan, and Al-Busaidi and Olfman (2005) in Oman.
KMS is considered as a type of Decision Support Systems (DSS).Well-designed decision supports systems guide decisionmakers in their efforts towards achieving their objectives through providing them with detailed information tailored specifically to their needs.A sizable literature looks into the effect of using DSS on decision making efficiency and effectiveness.One can review many of these studies in Dickson, Senn and Charvancy (1977), Jenkins (1977), Ives, Hamilton and Davis (1980), Courtney, DeSanctis and Kasper (1983), Jarvenpaa (1985), Sharda et al. (1988), Ganguly and Gupta (2005).
In relation to the current study, we believe that there is a great deal of understanding in the published literature (as will be seen shortly) that KM and KMS positively influence the performance of business processes.At the same time, the same literature still points out to a need for empirical research that shows that influence (Robles-Flores (2011)).Many other studies have reported that the use of KM and KMS result in business processes' benefits such as effectiveness, efficiency, innovativeness, productivity, and performance; and employees' benefits such as effective decision-making, better learning, adaptability, satisfaction, and performance, and many others (see Mohamed and Jalal (2011), Dermol (2011), Alavi and Linder (2001), Becerra-Fernandiz, Gonzalez and Sabherwal (2004), and Davenport and Prusak (1998)).
A review of the corporate portals literature reveals that there are limited studies that have focused on issues related to their Web design quality (Yang, Cai, Zhoue and Zhou (2005)).There are some studies in the KM literature, such as Chung and Lee (2007), Liu and Tsai (2007), Jiang and Liab (2008), Tiwana (2004), and Norman (2002) that have investigated the impact of KM, but at very limited KM processes and or benefits scales.Assessing the specific impact of each KM process independently has not been addressed adequately.Investigating the activities required for the systematic handling of knowledge resources is necessary (Heisig (2009)).
Relating KM and business processes is a critical success factor for KM and for effective use of corporate portal (Benbya et al. ( 2004)).Likewise, employees perceived that KMS benefits are a significant determinant of their use (Wu and Wang (2006), and Becerra-Fernandez et al. (2004)).Therefore, it is important for organizations to recognize the effect of supporting corporate portals KM processes on business processes and employees.
The use of corporate portals in universities is growing worldwide (Li and Wood (2005)).There is some literature on the use of corporate portals in academic institutions (Al-Busaidi (2009), Pino and Doucet (2007), Li and Wood (2005)); however, empirical studies that assess the impact of supporting KM processes through corporate portals on business processes and employees in the academic context are very limited.Al-Busaidi (2010)investigated this impact in an academic institution.Her study investigated KM processes based on Gold et al.'s (2001) classification.Studies are called for to investigate this impact based on different KM processes classifications.
United Arab Emirates' (UAE) private universities have been under growing pressure from their governmental counterparts to become more effective, efficient, innovative, and competitive.Their target has been to capture a reasonable market share of the higher education industry growing total demand.While anxiously searching for solutions, these universities have learnt that one of the most important competitive weapons is an efficient and effective knowledge management system.A system that is capable of increasing their business revenues while decreasing average operations costs.
Based on the above, the following is the research main question, which will drive the current study:"To what extent do Knowledge Management Systems influence the performance of business processes' and employees benefits?" The current study is an attempt to investigate the influence of corporate portal services on business processes' and employees' benefits.In order to answer the above main research question, the study seeks to find answers to such basic questions as: a.What kind of benefits can this portal realize?
b. What Knowledge Management Processes have greater impact on Business Processes' Performance?
c. What Knowledge Management Processes have greater impact on employees' benefits?
d. What are the functional relationships between corporate portal services and its end users and business processes?

Why Use Knowledge Management?
The environment in which organizations operate and make decisions today is becoming more and more difficult to deal with and predict.Business environment factors can be divided into four major _______________ Fadia M. Hegazy and Kamel E. Ghorab(2015), Communications of the IBIMA, DOI: 10.5171/2015.928262categories: markets, consumer demands, technology, and societal (Turban et al. (2011)).The intensity of most of these factors increases with time, leading to more pressures, more competition, and so on.In addition, organizations and departments within organizations face decreased budgets and amplified pressures from top managers to improve performance in terms of profitability, growth, and risk.
Based on related literature, Bacerra-Fernandez et al. ( 2004) note four trends that drive knowledge management: increasing domain complexity, accelerating market volatility, intensified speed of responsiveness, and diminishing individual experience.First, intricacy of internal and external processes, increased competition, and the rapid advancement of technology all contribute to increasing domain complexity.Second, the pace of change, or volatility, within each market domain has increased rapidly in the past decade.Third, the time required to take action based upon subtle changes within and across domains is decreasing.Fourth, high employee turnover rates have resulted in individuals with decision-making authority having less tenure within their organizations than ever before.
Adopting knowledge management, organizations can improve their capabilities of creating, managing, sharing and applying their knowledge, sharpen their business intelligence, enhance their managerial decisions efficiency and effectiveness, and ultimately achieve better business performance (Herschel and Jones (2005), and Lo and Chin (2009)).
Knowledge management is rooted in the concepts of organizational learning and organizational memory.When members of an organization collaborate and communicate ideas, teach, and learn knowledge is transformed and transferred from individual to individual (Bennet et al. (2003)).

Knowledge Management Processes
In his paper, Bray (2013)  The real value of a portal-based approach as it applies to business performance management is that the information delivered to the user is targeted and profile-driven.Thus, the right people get the right information at the right time.
One of the advantages of portals is that their use could bring down the cost of training.Portals advocate user-defined workspaces and encourage collaboration." According to Benbaya et al. (2004) f.Thus, as a result of their increased knowledge, improved market value, and greater on-the-job performance, KM facilitates employees' job satisfaction.

Prior Empirical Studies on Knowledge Management Processes and Benefits
The literature has very limited empirical studies that provided in depth investigations of the benefits of supporting KM processes through a corporate portal.However, there are several empirical quantitative studies that generally examined the impact of KM and KMS.For example, Gold et al (2001) found that knowledge infrastructure capability (technology, structure, and culture) and knowledge process capability (acquisition, conversion, application, and protection) improve organizational effectiveness in terms of innovation, adaptability, efficiency and market responsiveness.Lee and Choi (2003) found also that KM improves organizational effectiveness measured by organizational members' perceptions of the degree of the overall success, market share, profitability, growth rate, and innovativeness of the organization in comparison with key competitors.Nevertheless, very little empirical studies examined the specific impact of each of the KM processes independently.Few studies conducted investigation at very limited KM processes and/or benefits scales.There are a number of empirical studies that investigated the effect of knowledge acquisition.For example, Chang and Lee (2007) empirically verified the effects of knowledge acquisition, knowledge storage, and knowledge diffusion on organizational innovation.Liu and Tsai (2007)   The above cited empirical studies showed that knowledge acquisition (or creation) and knowledge sharing are the most investigated KM processes.Moreover, the benefits, highlighted in these cited studies fall within Becerra-Fernandez et al.'s benefits classification.

Hypotheses Development
Becerra-Fernandez et al. ( 2004) identify that knowledge management relied on four main kinds of knowledge management processes as follows: discovery, capture, sharing, and application (the left side in Figure 1).

1.
Knowledge Discovery.Knowledge discoverymay be defined as the development of new tacit (includes insights, intuitions, and hunches) or explicit knowledge (refers to knowledge that has been expressed into words and numbers) from data and information or from the synthesis of prior knowledge.The discovery of new explicit knowledge relies most directly on combination, whereas the discovery of new tacit knowledge relies most directly on socialization.Knowledge discovery is essential for the establishment of organizational memory (Becerra-Fernandez et al. ( 2004), and Davenport and Prusak (1998)).Corporate portals provide a rich working space that permits searching, accessing, processing, and querying content from different sources.They also provide collaboration and communication tools.Corporate portals speed up business processes through rapid access to relevant and accurate corporate information and knowledge (Gurgué (2002)  2. Knowledge Capture.Knowledge capture may be defined as the process of retrieving either explicit knowledge (that may reside in a manual or similar document or filebut few people might be aware of) or tacit knowledge (that may reside within people, artifacts, or organizational entities) (Becerra-Fernandez et al. ( 2004)).It is important to obtain the tacit knowledge from individuals' minds as well as the explicit knowledge from the manuals or similar documents, and make this knowledge available to others and to facilitate its sharing within the whole organization.
As discussed above, corporate portals provide rich common content that enables retrieving relevant content from explicit and tacit sources of knowledge through the sub-processes of externalization and internalization of knowledge.Employing different knowledge capture system tools, corporate portals speed up business processes, enable making better business choices, and help to adapt to changed circumstances through access to relevant, well-documented and integrative corporate information and knowledge (Alavi, et al. ( 2006)).Thus, corporate portals enable efficient and effective knowledge capture.According to Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995),externalizationinvolves converting tacit knowledge into explicit forms such as words, concepts, visuals, or figurative language (e.g., metaphors, analogies, and narratives).An example of externalization is a consultant team writing a document that describes the lessons the team has learned about the client organization, client executives, and approaches that work in such an assignment.This captures the tacit knowledge acquired by the team members.
On the other hand,internalizationinvolves converting explicit knowledge into tacit knowledge.It represents the traditional notion of learning.An example of internalization is a new software consultant reading a book on innovative software development and learning from it.This learning helps the consultant, and his/her organization, capture the knowledge contained in the book.
Technologies can also support knowledge capture by facilitating externalization and internalization.Externalization through knowledge engineering is necessary for the implementation of intelligent technologies such as expert systems and case-based reasoning systems.A knowledge developer converts human know-how into machineready "say-how" by using an iterative process of articulation, a series of refinement cycles, or rapid prototyping, in which the computer's performance is compared to that of the human expert.(2004), there is no intrinsic difference between the socialization process when used for knowledge discovery or knowledge sharing, although the way in which the process may be used could be different.For example, when used to share knowledge, a face-to-face meeting could involve a question-and-answer session between the sender and recipient of _______________ Fadia M. Hegazy and Kamel E. Ghorab(2015), Communications of the IBIMA, DOI: 10.5171/2015.928262knowledge, whereas when used to create knowledge a face-to-face meeting could take more the form of a debate or joint problem-solving.
Exchange, in contrast to socialization, focuses on the sharing of explicit knowledge.It is used to communicate or transfer explicit knowledge among individuals, groups, and organizations (Grant (1996)).In its basic nature, the process of exchange of explicit knowledge does not differ from the process through which information is communicated.An example of exchange is a product design manual being transferred by one employee to another, who can then use the explicit knowledge contained in the manual.Exchanging a document could also be used to transfer information.
Mechanisms and technologies that were discussed above supporting socialization in knowledge discovery systems also play an important role in knowledge sharing systems.In addition, knowledge sharing systems also utilize mechanisms and technologies that facilitate exchange.Some of the mechanisms that facilitate exchange are memos, manuals, progress reports, letters, and presentations.Technologies facilitating exchange include groupware and other team-collaboration mechanisms; Web-based access to data and databases; and repositories of information, including best practice databases, lessons learned systems, and expertise locator systems (Becerra-Fernandez et al. ( 2004)).
Not only knowledge sharing represents an important prerequisite for a successful knowledge application, but also it is an essential ingredient for an efficient and effective organizational knowledge management.Beccera-Fernandez et al. (2004) argue that knowledge management can improve the interrelated aspects of organizational processes (effectiveness, efficiency, and innovativeness) through several means, including better knowledge being imparted to individuals (through exchange, socialization, and so on).

4.
Knowledge Application.Knowledge application is the process of using knowledge to solve business problems and make business decisions.It includes the retrieval and application of knowledge.As discussed above, corporate reports include rich content that can be accessed and retrieved by users to solve problems and make decisions; corporate portals integrate corporate websites, corporate documents, business content, websites and news.
Knowledge contributes most directly to organizational performance when it is used to make decisions and perform tasks.Knowledge application supports the process through which some individuals utilize knowledge possessed by other individuals without actually acquiring, or learning, that knowledge.
Of course, the process of knowledge application depends on the available knowledge, and knowledge itself depends on the processes of knowledge discovery, capture, and sharing.The better the processes of knowledge discovery, capture, and share, the greater the likelihood that the knowledge needed is available for effective application in decision-making and task performance.Therefore, knowledge utilization benefits from two processes-routines and direction-that do not involve the actual transfer or exchange of knowledge between the concerned individuals but only the transfer of the recommendations that is applicable in a specific context (Grant (1996)).Directionrefers to the process through which the individual possessing the knowledge directs the action of another individual without transferring to that individual the knowledge underlying the direction.According to Conner and Prahala (1996), direction involves the transfer of instructions or decisions and not the transfer of the knowledge required to make those decisions, and hence it is labeled as knowledge substitution.For example, direction is the process used when a production worker calls an expert to ask him/her how to solve a particular problem with a machine and then proceeds to solve the problem based on the instructions given by the expert.Note the difference between direction and socialization or exchange, where the knowledge is actually transferred to the other person in either tacit form (socialization) or explicit form (exchange).

Routinesinvolve
the utilization of knowledge embedded in procedures, rules, and norms that guide future behavior.Routines could be automated through the use of IT, such as in systems that provide help desk agents, field engineers, consultants, and customer end users with specific and automated answers from a knowledge base (

Investigating Corporate Portal
The participants of this study represent users of a corporate portal in a private academic institution, ALHOSN University (AHU), in UAE.The AHU academic & administrative portal is a dynamic web- The AHU portal enables employees to acquire information and knowledge from different resources and applications.It aggregates and converts them into one single interface.Aggregated information and knowledge are customized and personalized according to the type of users, and their authorization level.
The main home page of AHU site provides links to general services data and general information such as the University's strategy, BOT (Board of Trustees), bylaws, and catalogue; academics; admissions; student services; faculty & staff services; career vacancies; media relations and other useful links.Through the faculty & staff services menu button, the main home page also has a login link to allow instructors and administrative staff to login into their personal pages using access authorization.
The content and services of the portal varies according to the users types (i.e., instructors, chair of departments, student advisor, administration staff, head of department).For instance, faculty & administrative staff's main page (menu choice) includes nine main sections: e-mail section, instructor's portal, Moodle, HR resources, back office, library, staff directory, calendar, and administration portal.The instructor's portal includes a home page, students, attendance, grading, scheduling, links, evaluations, and advisor services.Chair of departments have, in addition, chair services.Users, including instructors and administrators, login into their personal pages using access authorization (username and password).
In the "general section", instructors can: (1) view information about University regulations, workshops, conferences, and other University activities, and (2) link to relevant external websites.
In the "academic section", instructors can: (1) find information about their academic work (i.e., class details and schedules, teaching survey results, course offering, missed prerequisites, students, advisees etc.; (2) communicate through email with other external business partners, instructors, students and advisees; and (3) view and share their publication records, working papers, and study abstracts.
In the "services section", instructors can: (1) view several information and content such as employee details, training courses, official trips, borrowed and overdue books etc.; (2) communicate with several University units and request help desk services; (3) link to the University learning management systems (MOODLE), and link to the University Turn-It-In academic honesty program, (4) access different statistical analysis programs, and (5) email system.
In the "academics section", users can (1) view scheduled seminars and workshops, (2) list and view published studies abstracts, (3) list and view working paper series, and (4) look up different colleges', departments', programs' administration, faculty members, and supporting staff.
In the "students section", users can view different contents depending on whether the student is currently enrolled or future student.Current students can use the system to (1) view offered courses, program and university schedule, academic calendar, student's schedule, (2) access MOODLE e-learning system and different statistical analysis programs, (3) view paid and unpaid tuitions, financial assistance (if any), attendance record, and (4) view student handbook.Future students can (1) retrieve all relevant student forms, (2) apply to intended program, (3) file for transcripts, (4) submit special requests, and (5) lookup information about required conditions.

Data Collection and Sample Profile
Data were collected through personally handed-in and emailed questionnaire packages from end users of the portal of a medium size private university in Abu Dhabi (UAE).The authors together with three teaching assistants formed a data collection committee to manage the process.The questionnaire package included the questionnaire together with a detailed paper that explains each of its questions.The University staff phone directory was used as the study population frame.For two weeks, many of the filled-in questionnaires were collected.For another two weeks, the data collection committee made every effort to personally contact each of the University academic and support the staff who did not return or email back their individual filled questionnaires.In some cases, it needed some further explanation of a question or two.Collected questionnaires were checked for completeness.
The total respondents were 84, which represents about 70% of the invited portal.This 84 sample size represents end users, mainly faculty members.About 54% of the sample was male, and all the participants had average computer skills.About 72% of the sample size had academic positions.About 72% of the participants were faculty members.About 95% of the sample had at least 2 years work experience, and about 92% had at least 2 years of portal-use experience, and only 8% had a year or less of portal experience.About 58% of the participants were PhD holders, while 23% of them were MSc holders and 19% of them were BSc holders.

Research Questionnaire
A detailed questionnaire is developed, reviewed, pilot tested, and revised.Reliability and confirmatory factor analyses are employed to check reliability and validity aspects of the dependent and independent side variables.
The questionnaire included the study's constructs along with demographic questions (e.g.gender, age, degree, portal usage experience, work experience, and job title).Construct measurements items were phrased according to a 5-point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=neither agree nor disagree; 4=agree; and 5=strongly agree).
To evaluate this study's theoretical model, the questionnaire included 24 items that formed the independent constructs and dependent constructs (see Table 2).KM processes constructs were each assessed by three indicators, while KM benefits constructs were each assessed by two indicators.Constructs related to KM processes were adopted from Becerra-Fernandez et al. ( 2004), while constructs related to KM benefits were self-developed based on Becerra-Fernandez et al. ( 2004), and relevant literature.
The questionnaire was reviewed by three experts in the field to check the relevancy and clarity of the measurements.The questionnaire was also pre-tested by a small number of portal users to check the clarity of the measurements.Appendix A illustrates the measurements that were included in the questionnaire.

Construct and Variable Measurement
Since the constructs in Figures 1 are not directly measurable they must be implied from measured variables.Accordingly, a 'latent variable' design with multiple indicators for each construct was chosen.Constructs are represented by a combination of variables that can be empirically measured.This latent variable design has recently been applied in the management literature (e.g.Bagozzi (1980), Chin (1998), Fornell and Larcker (1981), Peterson (2000); Venkatraman and Ramanujam (1987), Keats and Hitt (1988)).The advent of structural equation modeling (SEM) with latent variables has changed the nature of research in strategic management, management information systems, e-business, organizational behavior, marketing, and consumer behavior (Henseler et al. (2009)).As Gefen, Straub and Boudreau (2000: p. 6) point out, 'SEM has become de rigueur in validating instruments and testing linkages between constructs."They further distinguish between two families of SEM techniques: covariance-based techniques, as represented by LISREL, and variance-based techniques, of which partial least squares (PLS) path modeling is the most prominent representative.

Partial Least Squares Analysis Methodology
A structural modeling approach was chosen to evaluate both error in construct measurement and error in hypothesized relations.Rather than using the well-known LISREL model, partial least squares (PLS) were employed.The choice was motivated by several considerations.First, managerial data do not often satisfy the requirements of multi-normality and interval scaling, or attain the sample size required by maximum-likelihood estimation (ML).Second, the PLS technique avoids many of the restrictive assumptions underlying ML techniques and ensures against improper solutions and factor indeterminacy.Data was analyzed using SmartPLS software.PLS is a variance-based structural equation model (SEM) technique that allows path analysis of models with latent variables.A general PLS model is composed of two parts: the structural model and the measurement model.The structural model specifies the relations among the constructs (or latent variables) while the measurement model specifies the relations between the manifest variables and the constructs which they represent.It is assumed for estimation purposes that the unobservables are specified as linear combinations of their respective indicators and, for convenience, that all variables are standardized.The measurement model enables us to evaluate whether the constructs are measured with satisfactory accuracy.
The evaluation of the model was based first on the assessment of the model measurements by assessing their validity and reliability.Second, it was based on the analysis of the paths of the structural model.The model included 10 constructs (4 exogenous and 6 endogenous) with 24 indicators.The total sample size used for analysis was 84.This sample size is more than sufficient to conduct SEM paths analysis of the research model according to Chin's (1998) recommendations.

Testing Procedure
A general PLS model is composed of two parts: the structural model and the measurement model.The structural model specifies the relations among the constructs (or latent variables) while the measurement model specifies the relations between the manifest variables and the constructs which they represent.It is assumed for estimation purposes that the unobservable constructs are specified as linear combinations of their respective indicators and, for convenience, that all variables are standardized.The measurement model enables us to evaluate whether the constructs are measured with satisfactory accuracy.PLS path models are formally defined by two sets of linear equations: The inner model and the outer model.The inner (structural) model specifies the relationships between unobserved or latent variables, whereas the outer (instrument) model specifies the relationships between a latent variable and its observed (or manifest) variables.
In order to simplify the notation of the model and in line with conventional descriptions of PLS, we assume that latent and manifest variables are standardized so that the location parameters can be Where ξ is the vector of latent variables, β denotes the matrix of coefficients of their relationships, and ζ represents the inner model residuals.The basic PLS design assumes a recursive inner model that is subject to predictor specification.Thus, the inner model constitutes a causal chain system (i.e., with uncorrelated residuals and without correlations between the residual term of a certain endogenous latent variable and its explanatory latent variables).Predictor specification reduces Eq. (1) to: PLS path modeling includes two different kinds of outer models: reflective and formative measurement models.A reflective mode has causal relationships from the latent variable to the manifest variables in its block.This is the mode of relationships between each latent variable and its manifest variables in the current study.
For example, consider the relationship between "Organizational efficiency" and both"Productivity improvement" and "Cost savings" in the study model.This relationship represents such a mode of relationship.Our model hypothesizes that, 'Organizational efficiency" reflects on "Productivity improvements" and "Cost savings."Thus, each manifest variable in a certain measurement model is assumed to be generated as a linear function of its latent variables and the residual ε: Where Λ represents the loading (pattern) coefficients.The outer relationships are also subject to predictor specificationimplying that there are no correlations between the outer residuals and the latent variable of the same block -that reduces Eq. (3) to: The formative mode of a measurement model has causal relationships from the manifest variables to the latent variable.This kind of mode of relationship does not exist in the current study model.Therefore, we are not going to show the mathematics of its relationships to limit the length of current presentation.

Constructs' Validity and Reliability
With PLS, the reliability of the measurements was evaluated by internal consistency, and the validity was measured by the average variance extracted (AVE), which refers to the amount of variance in a latent variable captured from its indicators.AVE is calculated as: Where λi is the loading of each measurement item on its corresponding construct.
While construct validity is an issue of measurement between constructs, reliability is an issue of measurement within a construct.The recommended level   The analysis shows that, first, providing tools that support knowledge discovery through a corporate portal was significantly positively associated with business processes' effectiveness (Beta of 0.301 and p-value <0.01), was significantly positively associated with employees' job satisfaction (Beta of 0.359 and p-value <0.01), was significantly positively associated with employees' learning (Beta of 0.2635 and pvalue <0.05), and was significantly positively associated with employees' adaptability (Beta of 0.252 and p-value < 0.05): thus Hypotheses 1a, 1d, 1e, and 1f are supported for knowledge discovery.Second, providing tools that support knowledge capture through a corporate portal was significantly positively associated with business processes' efficiency (Beta of 0.332 and p-value < 0.01), was significantly positively associated with business processes' effectiveness (Beta of 0.244 and p-value < 0.05), was significantly positively associated with employees' learning (Beta of 0.191 and p-value < 0.1), and was significantly positively associated with business processes' innovation (Beta of 0.156 and p-value < 0.1): hence Hypotheses 2a, 2b, 2c, and 2d are supported for knowledge capture.Third, providing tools that support knowledge sharing through a corporate portal was significantly positively associated with business processes' innovation (Beta of 0.374 and p-value < 0.01), was significantly positively associated with employees' learning (Beta of 0.178 and p-value < 0.1), and was significantly positively associated with employees' adaptability (Beta of 0.148 and p-value < 0.1): therefore Hypotheses 3c, 3d, and 3e are supported for knowledge sharing.
Fourth, providing tools that Figure 2 depicts the above detailed significant paths in the study.Only significant coefficients are shown.

Discussion of Findings
A corporate portal provides a gateway into corporate internal and external information and knowledge resources.Corporate portals are playing a major role on organizational knowledge management by incorporating tools for efficient access of organizational information knowledge, communication and collaboration.
The objective of this study was to identify the impact of supporting knowledge management processes (discovery, capture, sharing, and application) through a corporate portal on business processes' effectiveness, efficiency, and innovation; and employees' learning, adaptability, and job satisfaction.
The results suggested that supporting knowledge management through corporate portal had significant impacts on organizational business processes and employees.First, consistent with the literature and previous research knowledge sharing had the highest impact on business processes and employees.Knowledge sharing had a significantly positive impact on business processes' innovation (Beta = 0.374), employees' learning (Beta = 0.178), and employees' adaptability (Beta = 0.148).These findings are consistent with Stewart (2000), Becerra-Fernandez et al.Second, knowledge discovery had also significant impact on business processes and employees.However, it was a little less than the impact of knowledge sharing.Knowledge discovery had a significantly positive impact on business effectiveness (Beta = 0.301), but not efficiency, employees' learning (Beta = 0.264), employees' adaptability (Beta = 252), and employees' satisfaction (Beta = 0.359).These findings are consistent withBecerra- In fact this result makes a lot of practical sense.If the first phase of KM life cycle gets hold of the right knowledge needed by the organization, then the whole system will be able to furnish this knowledge through the following phases in the KM life cycle and vice versa.If this argument is valid, one would expect that knowledge capture would have the next highest impacts in significance.
Third, although knowledge capture had also significant impact on business processes and employees, this impact was less than the impact of each of knowledge sharing and knowledge discover, as expected.Knowledge capture had a significantly positive impact on business processes' efficiency (Beta = 0.332), business processes' effectiveness (Beta = 0.244), business processes' innovation (Beta = 0.156), and employees' learning (Beta = 0.191).These findings are consistent with Norman (2002) Finally, knowledge application had the lowest impact on business processes and employees, compared to the other KM processes.The analysis showed that providing tools that support knowledge application through a corporate portal had a significantly positive impact on employee satisfaction (Beta = 0.265), business processes' effectiveness (Beta = 0.164), and business processes' efficiency (Beta = 0.192).These results are consistent with Al-Busaidi (2005), Davenport and Prusak's (1998), and Liu (2003).
Investigating which of the business processes or employees' benefits are influenced more by the KM processes, one finds that both business processes' effectiveness and employees' job satisfaction are affected the highest.The correlations analysis in Table 3 provided some insights on this KM investigation.First, the high correlations between the employees' job satisfaction and the other business processes' and employees' benefits, suggest that the employees' job satisfaction may be associated with the net benefits gained from the system use.Thus, supporting KM processes through a corporate portal does not directly impact employees' job satisfaction (except for knowledge discovery and application), but indirectly through the other perceived net benefits (business processes' and employees' benefits).This is similar to DeLone and McLean's (2003), Jennex's (2008), Jennex and Olfman's (2006), and Al-Busaidi's (010) proposition of user satisfaction and net benefits.Second, the high correlation between employees' learning and adaptability (r = 0.61) indicated the strength of the relationship between the two.Employees' adaptability is highly related to their learning capability Becerra-Fernandez et al. (2004).Third, the high correlation between knowledge sharing and knowledge application (r = 0.71) illustrates the importance of knowledge sharing for effective knowledge application.Finally, the high correlation between each pair of the knowledge management processes illustrates a strong relationship between these processes for effective knowledge management Becerra-Fernandez et al. (2004).

Study Implications
In conclusion, this study provided some implications for practitioners and researchers.First, this study tackled an under investigated area in portals and KM literature, the impact of supporting KM through corporate portal on employees and business processes.The study confirmed for practitioners and researchers that the deployment of organizational KMS, specifically corporate portals, results in numerous benefits for business processes and employees.The study also provided measurements for evaluating such benefits.Second, the study empirically showed that a corporate portal is a promising technology for organizational knowledge management as it can be used as a tool to discover, capture, share, and apply organizational knowledge.A corporate portal provides employees with a rich shared information work space to discover, capture, share, and apply knowledge.Third, the study showed that the major impact of KMS results from the sharing knowledge.The benefits of KMS are achieved by the sharing of knowledge to carry out business processes, solve business problems, and make business decisions.Providing mechanisms and tools to support knowledge discovery and capture are important but not enough to fully harness the benefits of a KMS.Supporting and ensuring knowledge sharing will do that.Fourth, this study showed that corporate portal is a promising technology for organizational knowledge management at a Middle Eastern organization where countries need to increase their knowledge base, invest in educating their people, and take advantage of new technologies for acquiring and disseminating knowledge.Fifth, the study Communications of the IBIMA _______________ Fadia M. Hegazy and Kamel E. Ghorab(2015), Communications of the IBIMA, DOI: 10.5171/2015.928262illustrated the utilization of corporate portal for organizational knowledge management at an academic institution.Thus, this study provided measurements for academic institutions to evaluate the capability of their portals to support their organizational knowledge management.

Study Limitations
It is worthy to mention that the current study, like all others, is subject to some limitations.Generalizability of the analysis results may be perceived by certain reviewers as limited by variables included in the study model, study sample, items included in survey analysis, and nature of research.

Suggestions for Future Research
The UAE is a member of the GCC countries which represent one distinct culture block.If this is true, then it would be interesting to test the same study model on data from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, or Qatar (all are members of the same cultural block).Comparison between results from these different countries that relate to the same national block would constitute a real test of the study model and the effect of these culture-related variables.
The current study used data that are collected from a medium-size UAE university to investigate the effect of KM processes' support through a corporate portal on business processes' and employees' benefits.All staff members that were familiar with the university portal and were interested in participating in the study, were included in the study frame.This had the advantage of providing for a large population to select the sample from to satisfy different statistical analysis considerations.Also, it provides for enriching the analysis with reasonable degree of diversity of work, background, experience with computers & corporate portals.However, this was on the expense of work homogeneity of these staff members.It may be feasible in the future to have a larger number of faculty members at a large university to collect data from.This would control of work heterogeneity and test the effect of work homogeneity.
On one hand, it is possible that the factors being examined might involve also the impact of data security and the protection of intellectual property and know-how of the knowledge discovery, capture, sharing, and application processes.It would be interesting to design a further new study to investigate how to adjust the study factors for these impacts.
On the other hand, there is a potential plan for the research repetition after a 5 to 10 years period of time.It would be interesting to include the same research sample to see the changes and potential improvements in the researched areas.
The current study's focus was on the experience of a UAE university academic and administrative staff's perceptions of knowledge management.Culture related variables are significant determinants of knowledge management use and success.
The current study is based on Becerra-Fernandez et al.'s (2004) model to investigate the functional relationships between knowledge management processes, on one hand, and business processes; and employees' benefits, on the other hand.It is always interesting to investigate these kinds of relationships under another theoretical framework.This would represent a feasible research project for the future.
Most of the participants in the current study were informed, as promised earlier, about the results.More than 80% of them agree with the study findings.Based on the University directions, a detailed report about the study findings is underway.The report mainly highlights the implementation of specific improvements in existing portal based on identified gaps and drawbacks.
Communications of the IBIMA _______________ Fadia M. Hegazy and Kamel E. Ghorab(2015), Communications of the IBIMA, DOI: 10.5171/2015.928262productivity.In the context of knowledge portal, Toe and Men (2008) found that the utilization of knowledge portal improves firms' performance.Also, De Carvalho, Ferreira, Choo and De Silva (2007) found the usage of enterprise portal improves sense making, knowledge creation and decision making.

Figure 1 :
Figure 1: The Study Model Communications of the IBIMA _______________ Fadia M. Hegazy and Kamel E. Ghorab(2015), Communications of the IBIMA, DOI: 10.5171/2015.928262 based electronic gateway on the University internal and external data, information and knowledge resources.The portal has several features such as content management, information aggregation, searching and indexing, personalization, single sign interface and content.

Figure 2 :
Figure 2: Significant Paths' Coefficients between the Model Constructs