The objectives of the study are as follows:

A knowledge-based view (KBV) was developed as a result of current research in management and economics literature, and it proposed that the development, integration and use of knowledge is what drives the existence of businesses (Donate & De Pablo 2015). The KBV is a development of an organisation’s resource-based view (RBV), which emphasises strategic assets as the primary driver of competitive edge (Amit & Schoemaker 1993). The present study centred its attention on the KBV, a contemporary perspective that is employed to comprehend KM within the SDPs. According to the KBV, intellectual assets play a crucial role as a fundamental organisational resource, facilitating the attainment of a competitive edge that can be sustained. With the current circumstances, knowledge has become a critical element within the organisations (Chang & Lin 2015).

From this standpoint, organisations that successfully oversee their knowledge resources may anticipate many advantages (Azeem et al. 2021), including decreased expenses related to people and infrastructure, along with enhanced innovation, organisational effectiveness and customer satisfaction (Abbas & Kumari 2021). The fundamental objective of an organisation’s application of KM is to become conscious of its knowledge, both personally and collectively, and to reshape itself to make the greatest use of the knowledge the company has or can acquire (Donate & De Pablo 2015).

According to Alavi and Leidner (2001), the implementation of KM practices, which often depend on technologies, results in favourable organisational outcomes like improved interaction and a greater degree of employee involvement, efficacy in problem-solving and time to market, higher-performing financial results, enhanced advertising techniques and increased teamwork and performance, which explains the broad understanding of the importance of KM. However, innovation appears to be the most significant problem for KM in knowledge-intensive industries because competitive advantage rests greatly on a firm’s capacity to continuously develop novel goods and processes (Fachrunnisa, Adhiatma & Tjahjono 2020).

In adherence to ethical guidelines, the research conducted herein received approval from the Economic and Management Sciences Research Ethics Committee (EMS-REC) at North-West University. Prior to commencing the study, all procedures and protocols were carefully reviewed and approved by the committee to ensure the protection of human subjects and the ethical conduct of research. Participants were provided with informed consent forms outlining the purpose, procedures, risks and benefits of the study and were assured of their voluntary participation and confidentiality of their data. Measures were taken to minimise any potential risks or discomfort to participants throughout the duration of the study. Additionally, all data collected was treated with strict confidentiality and anonymity. This study was conducted in accordance with the ethical principles outlined by the North-West University and the guidelines set forth by the Economic and Management Sciences Research Ethics Committee (EMS-REC), demonstrating our commitment to upholding the highest standards of integrity and respect for participants’ rights (NWU-01830-22-A4).

Cronbach’s alpha was employed to assess the internal consistency and reliability of the measurement instruments. To provide satisfactory dependability, it is necessary to have a value exceeding 0.7 (Lobiondo & Haber 2013; Samuels 2017; Shuttleworth 2015). Based on the findings presented in Table 2, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for each research construct indicate a range of 0.799 to 0.949. Given that all of these values are above the threshold of 0.7, the findings therefore confirm the dependability of the measures employed in this study.

Validity tests were conducted, and convergent and discriminant validity were evaluated. Both tests are described below as well as the findings in Table 3. Convergent validity is a measure of the extent to which the indicators of a concept converge, as determined by the explanation of item variance (Sarstedt et al. 2014). Furthermore, the assessment of the convergent validity of measurement items may be accomplished by examining the correlations within the item-total index, as demonstrated by Nusair et al. (2010). The convergent validity was achieved through item-to-total correlation values that ranged between 0.534 and 0.839 as indicated in Table 3. The results indicate the values of 0.5 and higher suggest a convergent validity (Cheung et al. 2023).

Hair et al. (2014) state that to determine whether discriminant validity exists, it is necessary to determine whether the observed variable has a higher loading on its construct than on any other construct included in the structural model. As suggested by Chinomona (2011), the correlation between the research constructs must be less than 1.0 to ascertain discriminant validity. As demonstrated in Table 4, the inter-correlation values for all paired latent variables are less than 1, indicating the existence of discriminant validity.

The association among the established constructs varied from a slight negative value of –0.145* (illustrating discriminant validity) to a moderate positive value of 0.468** (suggesting reasonable convergent validity). Analysis of the correlation matrix between these constructs indicates the presence of discriminant validity because of their considerable dissimilarity.

With regard to the KM processes within the SDPs, individual responses on the measurement items showed that the majority of respondents agreed with all the measurement items as demonstrated in Table 5. The highest percentage of respondents (42.2%) agreed with the statement ‘knowledge created within the organisation is easily accessible’, followed by 41.4% who also agreed that ‘Sharing of knowledge across departments is easy’.

In the findings, it is highlighted that KM processes (creation, capturing, retention and sharing) are practised within the SDPs. From the results, it is revealed that access to knowledge within the SDPs was chosen as an essential aspect of the KM processes by the majority of the respondents. In general, KM processes are essential for organisations striving to remain competitive in the contemporary knowledge-based economy (Zaim, Muhammed & Tarim 2019). The SDPs are knowledge-driven because of the nature of the training and development programmes they are offering. Employees’ access to knowledge in this skills-driven environment is important for the organisation, as it will enable the employees to be up-to-date and knowledgeable. This access to knowledge confirms that the SDPs have in place proper and user-friendly systems or tools to access knowledge.

Moreover, it is discovered from the results that the sharing of knowledge across departments is easy in the SDPs. With easy access to knowledge, employees can share the created or acquired knowledge within the organisation. This emphasises that the sharing of knowledge is very important in the skills sector. Every employee needs to be up to date and well informed about the development in the organisation. Additionally, the acknowledgment of knowledge as a crucial asset for organisations within the contemporary business landscape affirms the necessity for KM processes that enable the creation, distribution, and implementation of both individual and collective knowledge (Martelo-Landroguez & Cepeda-Carrión 2016). Employees must understand the value of KM processes to contribute to the creation of new knowledge, including how it is acquired and stored for future purposes. This knowledge should also be shared with everyone to facilitate the successful implementation. As a result, the KM process is a critical component in the SDPs in the facilitation of KM implementation.

This study aimed to analyse the STKM at the SDPs. The findings indicated that the majority of respondents agreed with all statements on STKM as demonstrated in Table 6. On the item ‘Online Meeting, Messaging and Boardroom discussions’, the majority of the respondents (50.2%) agreed with the statement. The second item to be selected by the employees with (42.6%) majority was based on ‘Training and Support (Online learning)’.

This portrays that online meetings, messaging and boardroom discussions are preferred system tools to facilitate KM in the SDPs. These system tools are considered effective and efficient by the employees of the SDPs. Employees recognise the important function of system tools in aiding KM; it can be emphasised that these tools are commonly known and utilised by employees at a regular basis whether in personal or work-related encounters. These tools contribute immensely to the creation, acquisition, storing, sharing and application of knowledge in the organisation. The use of tools enables the organisation to be effective and efficient in facilitating KM.

The main function of the SDPs is training and development. It is worth noting that the employees who are tasked to conduct skills development programmes recognised training as one of the critical components for STKM in the SDPs. Hence, KM system tools are regarded as methods and techniques that organise and categorise explicit knowledge logically and systematically gather, organise and standardise all the accumulated knowledge (Wu et al. 2011).

Several system tools have been developed and used to facilitate the deployment of KM in businesses. System tools that enable KM can be categorised based on their strategic approach, operational processes and technological capabilities. The tools in question have seen significant improvements in their characteristics and capabilities because of technological developments (Osman, Noah & Saad 2022). On the contrary, Reddy, Reddy and Jonnalagadda (2022) asserted that improper use of STKM can lead to a decline in employee performance, innovation, quality of service, user satisfaction and other related factors. It is critical for the SDPs to have various system tools to facilitate KM implementation, and such tools must be maintained regularly.

One of the research objectives for this study was to assess drivers for KM within the SDPs. According to the results, the majority of respondents agreed with each and every driver for KM items in the measurement scale demonstrated in Table 7. On the item ‘Enhancing work quality of projects’, the majority (40.5%) of the respondents were in agreement, followed by 39.7% of the respondents who also agreed with the statement on ‘Sharing employees’ expertise and perceptions’.

The findings allude that within the drivers of KM in the SDPs, employees are more concerned with enhancing the work quality of training projects they are conducting. This means that to drive KM in the organisation, it is critical to enhance the quality of work on projects. This in turn will lead to customer satisfaction and gives the organisation a competitive advantage over its competitors.

Coming to the findings on the statement ‘Sharing employees’ expertise and perceptions’, it is important to mention that these findings validate the results of KM processes on the item ‘Sharing of knowledge across departments is easy’. It is presented that the employees in the SDPs are sharing their expertise and perceptions. In order for the skills development programms to be executed and be successful, it is compulsory for the employees to share their expertise and perceptions. The staff component of these training enterprises is made up of individuals possessing different qualification levels and work experiences. The acknowledgement of empoyees’ expertise and perceptions is considered an essential driver of KM in the SDPs.

The concept of a KM driver refers to a critical and indispensable element or circumstance that enables an organisation to effectively implement KM practices. This implies that the organisation must allocate attention to both favourable circumstances and pertinent variables in order to effectively implement KM (Wu et al. 2011). To achieve and sustain a competitive advantage, organisations must integrate appropriate key drivers for KM into their operations to enhance the KM resources (Ling et al. 2008). Through the drivers for KM, firms are anticipated to acquire the capacity to effectively manage their knowledge resources and, eventually, attain their strategic objectives (Yu, Kim & Kim 2004). Therefore, the SDPs should be conversant with the drivers for KM in their organisations and be in a position to promote and maintain their execution towards KM implementation.

Another objective of this article was to measure KMBC in the SDPs. According to the findings, nearly half of the respondents agreed with each item on the KMBC within the SDPs (see Table 8). However, on the item ‘Lack of resources in terms of a budget, staff, and IT infrastructure’, the majority (38.4%) of the respondents were in agreement with the statement. Additionally, 36.3% of the respondents agreed with both statements concerning ‘Lack of training, support and, leadership’.

The results indicate that the lack of resources is prevailing in the skills development enterprises. From this perspective, it is evident that the deficiency of resources such as budget, staff and IT is a serious barrier or challenge in skills development organisations. Without proper and sufficient resources, KM practice will never be realised. Furthermore, ‘Lack of training, support and, leadership’ in the SDPs were also identified as barriers or challenges for effective KM. If employees are not provided adequate training and support in KM practices, it will hamper the efficacy of the skills organisations. Without the leadership from the management of these skills enterprises, it will be impossible for KM to be implemented. The management needs to lead by example and provide guidance and support throughout the KM practice.

The employees need to be conscious of the factors that hamper their productivity and organisational success. Most organisations operate on strict budget allocations, whereas others struggle with the provision of resources. In such instances, it compels the employees to sacrifice, compromise and improvise on the organisational resources to keep the basic operations ongoing. To support the findings, a study conducted by Sharma and Singh (2015) has also identified several barriers and challenges related to KM within organisational contexts. These include a lack of involvement from the management team, an unsupportive organisational structure, little understanding of technology, a failure to learn from previous mistakes, a lack of trust among staff members, inadequate training programmes, restrictions on the distribution of knowledge and a scarcity of resources in terms of finance, IT infrastructure and human resources. Bartczak (2012) conducted a study to determine the existence of KM barriers. The study highlighted several difficulties encountered in KM implementation, such as the need for leadership training and dedication and the scarcity of resources. Therefore, the existence of KMBC should be evident to the management and employees within the SDPs. Additionally, measures should be put in place to overcome such obstacles towards KM implementation.

The findings of this study are important to the skills development sector because this work has presented the literature on KM in SDPs. It is fundamental and required that the concept of KM is given more attention especially as the SDPs exist in the knowledge economy. It will be detrimental to the employee and management of the skills development sector enterprises to ignore the impact and value of KM in their organisations. In addition, it is also logical for the owners or managers of the SDPs to identify individuals within their organisations to work as knowledge specialists and dedicate duties and responsibilities for them to be able to enhance KM practices. With all the available KM systems and implementation plans in place, such resources will allow the SDPs to implement KM. The organisations will benefit and see the importance of KM in their operations and through their products and services.

The limitation of this study was the data collection that was aimed at the employees exclusively of the owners or managers of SDPs in the North West province of South Africa. Additionally, limiting the gathering of data to a single province restricts the ability to generalise the study’s findings. However, if the collected data were acquired from all the provinces, it would have made the findings applicable to the whole population of the SDPs in South Africa. The absence of an updated database of the accredited SDPs in the North West province from other SETAs entails that other organisations might have been left out of the study. This might have a negative impact on the study’s sample size calculation, which was based on the databases of the accredited and active SDPs provided by the SETAs. Lastly, future research should be conducted with the use of a qualitative approach to acquire an in-depth understanding of KM in the SDPs.