Original Research

Knowledge management in the South African Police Service: A critical reflection on processes and enablers

Mohamed A. Badat, Visvanathan Naicker

Received: 19 Aug. 2025; Accepted: 05 Dec. 2025; Published: 13 Mar. 2026

Copyright: © 2026. The Authors. Licensee: AOSIS.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Abstract

Background: Knowledge management (KM) research in the public sector remains insufficiently explored and underdeveloped. It is important for public sector employees to be cognisant of the merits of KM initiatives and the factors and enablers that contribute to successful KM implementation within their respective organisations.

Objectives: The study sought to conduct a critical assessment of the KM processes and to identify key enablers of these processes within a public sector organisation.

Method: A qualitative approach, using a case study research strategy, was employed to achieve the study’s research objectives.

Results: There are numerous formal structures and systems supporting KM practices within the South African Police Service (SAPS). Certain practices are consistent with the KM practices indicated in the literature, such as benchmarking practices and collaboration through informal social networks. There are also several limitations, including training practices that do not ensure staff competency, which hinder the creation of knowledge within the sector.

Conclusion: Critically assessing KM practices to identify their benefits and key enablers is likely to foster greater employee engagement in these initiatives within organisations.

Contribution: This study responds to a specific need for research that raises awareness among public sector employees about the contributions of KM practices, as well as the factors and enablers that support their successful implementation within their organisations. Critical enablers of KM processes within the SAPS include a leadership style that motivates and inspires subordinates, trust-based relationships with the community, including strong informal networks of informants, and crime-analysis-driven operations.

Keywords: knowledge management; knowledge creation; knowledge storage; knowledge sharing; knowledge application; knowledge management enablers; public sector.

Introduction

Organisational culture influences employees’ attitudes and responses towards knowledge sharing (Halawi 2023). The lack of a culture that supports knowledge sharing and an understanding of knowledge management (KM) benefits within an organisation poses obstacles to KM implementation (Yang, Yeh & Lee 2010). Hence, it is important that employees are cognisant of the benefits of KM practices and the factors and enablers that contribute to successful KM implementation within their organisations.

Edwards and Lönnqvist (2023), who conducted a comprehensive study of future KM research areas, highlighted the need for more research on what organisations are actually doing regarding KM practices. Several recent studies (Kassa & Ning 2023; Laihonen, Kork & Sinervo 2024; Muzzio & Gama 2024) indicate that KM research in the public sector is limited and lacks academic inquiry. Dayal (2023) affirms that there is a need to understand KM practice in the public sector, explore its relevance for improving public policy development and ensure sustainability in public knowledge systems. Kassa and Ning (2023) and Oluikpe (2012) argue that KM in the public sector is under-researched compared to that in the private sector. Kassa and Ning (2023) elaborate that the existing literature on KM within the public sector is scarce and predominantly addresses macro-level perspectives. They contend that, overall, KM research in the public sector remains insufficiently explored and underdeveloped.

From a South African perspective, Nenungwi and Garaba (2022) assert that a limited number of government departments in South Africa have implemented formal KM practices. Their research highlights a knowledge gap in employee awareness of KM initiatives and their benefits within South African public service organisations. The study done by Mofokeng (2020) indicates that implementing successful KM initiatives in the South African Police Service (SAPS) remains a challenge, as the organisation strives to improve its KM approach. Dayal (2023) attests that behind successful organisations lies an effective KM strategy. However, the implementation and use of KM have been limited in scope and challenging for the South African public sector, where KM efforts are still fragmented and lack a structured approach.

Problem statement

There is a lack of KM research in the public sector globally, as demonstrated by the above-mentioned literature, creating a need to explore and understand KM practices in this context. Public sector employees must be cognisant of the merits of KM initiatives, along with the factors that enable their successful implementation. Moreover, the researcher argues that there is limited research that critically assesses KM processes within SAPS, relevant to crime prevention, response, and detection. Long-standing concerns regarding the effectiveness of training and development initiatives (Moitsadi et al. 2024), combined with inadequate resourcing and declining community trust (Modise 2024), further undermine the effectiveness of SAPS’s KM processes. These challenges underscore the need for additional studies that critically examine SAPS’s KM processes.

This study addresses the aforementioned gaps by fulfilling the following research objective: to conduct a critical assessment of the KM processes and to identify key enablers of these processes, using SAPS, a public sector organisation in the Western Cape, South Africa, as a case study.

Literature review

The theoretical and conceptual frameworks for this study are discussed next.

Theoretical framework

The theoretical framework defines and contextualises the key concepts relevant to this study and provides the theoretical underpinning for designing the study’s conceptual framework.

Knowledge

Despite variations in the way some of the KM experts define knowledge, they all (Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995; Omotayo 2015; Rainer & Prince 2023; Saleh, Sani & Noordin 2018) concur that knowledge is information that is contextual, relevant and actionable, and consists of explicit and tacit knowledge. This definition of knowledge applies to this study.

Knowledge management

According to Wooi (2024), KM entails a number of activities intended to identify, collect, organise, share and transfer relevant information and competencies within an organisation. North and Kumta (2018) assert that KM is a collective and systematic process that allows employees and organisations to create, share and apply knowledge to achieve strategic and operational objectives. The researcher considers Heisig’s (2009) study on KM frameworks, including processes, one of the most comprehensive investigations conducted on the subject. The four KM processes indicated in Heisig’s (2009) three-layered KM framework, namely, create, store, share and apply, are the ones that were most frequently mentioned in his findings as broad categories of KM, and are used in the current study when referring to ‘KM processes’.

Knowledge creation

Knowledge creation occurs when employees develop new ways of doing things (Rainer & Prince 2023). Hajric (2018) explains that knowledge is created through practice, collaboration, interaction and education. Park (2007) groups ‘knowledge acquisition and creation’ as a single activity within the KM process and explains that organisations acquire knowledge externally through practices such as benchmarking, hiring consultants or experts and attending conferences, and internally by identifying staff that possess the requisite expertise and tapping into that knowledge, learning from experience and implementing continuous process improvement. This study adopts Park’s (2007) view of knowledge acquisition and creation as an integrated activity within knowledge creation.

Knowledge storage

Jasimuddin (2012) asserts that current, relevant and correct knowledge must be stored in the knowledge repository and easily retrieved. Rainer and Prince (2023) argue that knowledge must be refined, that is knowledge must be contextualised prior to storing such knowledge in a knowledge repository, and this may require that the tacit qualities of the knowledge are captured together with the explicit facts wherever possible. The view of knowledge being refined or codified prior to storage has been adopted for this study. Tacit knowledge, which is not refined or made explicit, would be difficult for employees to comprehend and apply.

Knowledge sharing

Knowledge sharing is described as a process through which knowledge is exchanged between and among employees (Vacalares & Manigo 2022). Hajric (2018) describes knowledge sharing as a two-way process, in which either employees seek out relevant knowledge sources, including searching the company’s intranet, or the knowledge is disseminated to employees through means such as emails and newsletters. Park (2007) refers to this activity as knowledge transfer and sharing, and explains that through this activity, knowledge is made more active and relevant in creating value for the organisation during the next phase or activity, that is knowledge application. Park’s (2007) view of knowledge sharing has been adopted for this study, whereby the process of ‘knowledge sharing’ makes provision for knowledge transfer and sharing. Effective knowledge sharing requires that knowledge be formally or intentionally transferred and shared within an organisation through initiatives such as written communications, training, internal seminars and conferences, internal publications, job rotation and transfer, and mentoring (Park 2007).

The significance of social relationships in knowledge creation and sharing cannot be understated. Stadler and Fullagar (2016) found that both formal and informal knowledge transfer practices contribute towards producing a collaborative culture. Nakano, Muniz and Batista’s (2013) enquiry into more unstructured work environments indicates that tacit knowledge sharing is facilitated by an ‘engaging environment’ characterised by shared language and knowledge, achieved through intense communication, close relationships, and a social climate pervasive of openness and trust. Cowan, Burton and Moreto (2019) assert that information which is shared through informal social networks is more detailed, accurate and timely when compared to information obtained through formal channels, such as police information databases.

Knowledge application

Knowledge application can be described as the use of information acquired through various channels, to achieve an organisation’s goals and objectives within a shorter timeframe (Ouko & Gatero 2023). North and Kumta (2018) assert that the knowledge which is acquired and shared must be put to optimal use within an organisation. Park (2007) expresses that knowledge application should ensure that the knowledge is being deployed in producing goods and services. Knowledge should be used in performing core tasks or functions and making important decisions, and should form part of the organisation’s core business processes. Gasik (2011) asserts that organisational routines or processes, guidelines and instructions, and self-organising teams are the main mechanisms that assure the application of knowledge. These are important considerations when investigating the effectiveness of knowledge application processes within SAPS.

The aforementioned definitions and descriptions of KM practices contributed to the theoretical underpinning and the design of the study’s conceptual framework.

Nonaka’s socialisation, externalisation, combination, and internalisation model

Nonaka (1994) explains that knowledge can be created within an organisation by converting the tacit knowledge, which resides within an organisation, into explicit knowledge through four phases, namely socialisation, externalisation, combination and internalisation (SECI). On the basis of Nonaka’s (1994) SECI model, the researcher contends that an effective deployment of KM processes, which leads to knowledge creation within an organisation, must comprehensively address the stages of SECI.

Socialisation occurs when individuals work in the same environment and share their experiences through joint face-to-face interactions, thereby spreading tacit knowledge within an organisation (Nonaka 1994). The researcher asserts that the socialisation phase is closely linked to the KM process of knowledge sharing and, hence, points to the importance of organisations creating opportunities for employees to collaborate.

Externalisation occurs when a person’s tacit knowledge is converted into forms that others can understand and communicate. Successful knowledge transfer happens when tacit insights are made explicit through face-to-face discussion, attentive listening and visual representations of ideas (Nonaka 1994). Building on the socialisation phase, the externalisation phase indicates that employees need to be given sufficient opportunities not only to be exposed to new situations but also to absorb and contextualise, and to be able to clearly explain the new knowledge or skills that they have acquired. Hence, they will be able to transfer this new knowledge or skills to others. The researcher contends that the externalisation phase is supported by the KM process of knowledge storage in that the newly created tacit knowledge must firstly be codified into explicit knowledge, prior to it being stored.

Combination occurs when individuals or groups socially interact and exchange and combine their differing explicit knowledge, thereby enhancing the overall explicit knowledge in the relevant area (Nonaka 1994). Hence, new and advanced knowledge is created. The researcher contends that the combination phase is linked to the KM process of knowledge sharing. This highlights the importance of organisations creating structures and opportunities for employees with relevant expertise to interact, brainstorm and collaborate; by doing so, they integrate the respective sources of knowledge, thereby creating advanced knowledge.

Internalisation occurs when new explicit knowledge is taken in and turned into tacit know-how by people, teams or the entire organisation. Explicit knowledge is internalised through practises such as on-the-job training, simulations and experiments, that is the acquired knowledge is being practised (Nonaka 1994). The researcher asserts that the internalisation phase is closely linked to the KM process of knowledge application.

It is clear from the preceding discussion that the four key KM processes identified through Heisig’s (2009) three-layered KM framework, namely, create, store, share and apply, are evident or intersect with Nonaka’s (1994) SECI model at various stages. Furthermore, the researcher believes that the overall performance of Nonaka’s (1994) SECI model, regarding the creation of knowledge within an organisation, is more likely to produce good results if the preceding phase(s) is/are carried out effectively, which in turn bolsters the effectiveness of the phases that follow. The preceding statements suggest that the four above discussed KM processes are positively associated.

Knowledge management enablers

Kumar, Singh and Haleem (2014) describe enablers as variables which contribute towards making the KM process more effective in organisations, whereas barriers would hinder the enablement of the KM process. Several researchers (Al Dhanhani & Al Naqbi 2022; Albats, Kordab & Raudeliuniene 2021; Edwards & Lönnqvist 2023; Heisig 2009; Kumar et al. 2014; Modise 2024; Mofokeng 2020; Oliva & Kotabe 2019; Wooi 2024) have identified the enablers of and barriers to the practice of KM in their studies. A list of key KM enablers extracted from the aforementioned studies, together with those identified in the previous sections of this literature review, contributed towards formulating the conceptual framework as depicted in Figure 1.

FIGURE 1: Conceptual framework of knowledge management enablers and processes within South African Police Service.

Conceptual framework

The components of the above-discussed theoretical framework are integrated to form the conceptual framework for this study (Figure 1).

The conceptual framework (Figure 1) provided the theoretical underpinning and lens through which to adopt a structured approach to data collection, analysis and interpretation; thereby contributing to the credibility and validity of the study.

Methodology

Research design

Aligned with the study of Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2009), this study adopted an inductive research approach, in which data were collected and a theory was developed to respond to the respective research questions. Moreover, the study adopted the case study research strategy in which the qualitative data collected were used to critically assess the KM processes within SAPS. Mouton (2022) describes case studies as usually qualitative in nature, aiming to provide an in-depth description of a small number of cases. The aforementioned author attributes high construct validity, the ability to gain in-depth insights and the establishment of rapport with interviewees as strengths associated with case studies.

Sampling and respondents

Saunders et al. (2009) explain that in non-probability sampling, the probability of each case being selected from the sample is not known. Purposive sampling, which is a non-probability sampling technique, is when the researcher uses her or his judgement to select cases that would be most suitable in answering the relevant research questions and satisfying the desired research objectives. In this study, non-probability sampling, using the purposive sampling technique, was used to identify respective interviewees, namely 10 senior officials (station commanders or equivalent) from 10 police stations within the Western Cape, who possessed relevant KM expertise at the station level. The interviewees, labelled respectively as I1–I10, were selected from police stations located in communities with high, medium and low levels of crime.

Data collection

Qualitative data were collected through semi-structured interviews. Saunders et al. (2009) assert that semi-structured interviews provide the researcher with the opportunity to ‘probe’ answers, in which they want their interviewees to explain or build on their responses. The process of data collection was guided by saturation. Charmaz (2006) explains that there is no need to collect additional data if the data no longer provide new insights. The sample of 10 police stations sufficed in terms of eliciting the relevant data from the respective station commander at each police station.

Guided by Korstjens and Moser (2018), the researcher undertook the following to enhance credibility regarding the qualitative research findings. Firstly, data were obtained from multiple data sites. Data were obtained from 10 different police stations within the Western Cape. Furthermore, the respective police stations selected for this study were representative of serving areas with high, medium, and low crime rates. Secondly, the process of ‘member check’ was conducted throughout the research process. Data, analytical categories, interpretations and conclusions relevant to the data collected were fed back to the respective interviewees.

Data analysis

Creswell (2014) provides a linear, hierarchical approach for analysing qualitative data, which includes organising and preparing the raw data for analysis, reading through all the data, coding the data by hand or computer, interrelating the themes and descriptions emerging from the data, and finally interpreting the meaning of themes and/or descriptions. In this study, themes and sub-themes were derived inductively. The responses obtained through the interviews were coded and assessed for common themes and sub-themes. Content relevant to the respective research questions was developed through an iterative process of gathering the data, coding, analysing and refining the data set. ATLAS.ti was used to assist with the process of organising the data and segmenting it into codes and sub-codes.

The following validity strategies recommended by Creswell (2014) were adhered to in this study:

• Themes were established by converging perceptions from several interviewees.
• The qualitative findings are described in detail, making provision for different perspectives applicable to the respective themes, and this activity includes presenting information that contradicts the general perspective for the theme.
• The qualitative report was approved by the research supervisor (promoter), thereby increasing the likelihood that it would be favourably accepted by others.

In addition, to ensure qualitative rigour and trustworthiness, the study was guided by Korstjens and Moser (2018) in addressing the requirements for dependability, confirmability and transferability. The researcher ensured accurate record-keeping during each step of the research process. Feedback was obtained from research participants to verify the accuracy of their interview transcripts and to confirm their support for the study’s findings, interpretations and recommendations. Moreover, descriptive information, such as the research context, sample size, sampling strategy and interview procedure, has been clearly outlined.

The research questions addressed included:

RQ1: What would be considered established practices regarding KM processes within SAPS?

RQ2: How closely do current KM practices align with industry standards commonly recognised as enablers of KM processes?

RQ3: What would be considered good or best practices regarding KM processes within SAPS?

RQ4: What are the key factors or variables that would enable each of the respective KM processes within SAPS?

Ethical considerations

Ethical clearance to conduct this study was obtained from the University of South Africa School of Business Leadership Research Ethics Review Committee (Ref. No. 2020_SBL_DBL_030_FA).

Results

Description and critical assessment of knowledge management practices within the South African Police Service (addresses RQ1 and RQ2)

The following section expounds on the established KM practices regarding knowledge creation, storage, sharing and application within SAPS, and provides a critical analysis of each. This analysis is guided by the KM enablers incorporated into the study’s conceptual framework (Figure 1), which serves as the basis for evaluating the effectiveness of these practices. The description of the established KM practices for knowledge creation, storage, sharing and application predominantly addresses RQ1, whereas the critical assessment of the practices linked to each process predominantly addresses RQ2. The following findings are based on the interviews conducted with the 10 station commanders within SAPS.

Description and critical assessment of knowledge creation practices

Figure 2 presents the knowledge creation practices that emerged from the interview data collected at police stations.

FIGURE 2: Factors or variables that enable knowledge creation within South African Police Service.

The following discussion elucidates and critically analyses the knowledge creation practices in SAPS (Figure 2), using the study’s conceptual framework (Figure 1) as a guiding lens.

Interviewees predominantly indicated that training programmes and workshops, coordinated through the national, provincial and station cluster offices, play a significant role in promoting knowledge creation at police stations. Training, education and skills acquisition have been identified as KM enablers in the study’s theoretical framework. However, it is concerning that many interviewees raised several challenges regarding the implementation of training as a driver of knowledge creation within the sector, for instance, an Interviewee stated:

‘I believe the organisation must also do this. For an example, there must be a Portfolio of Evidence (PoE) after you receive the training. You must still go on with your training and give feedback till the member … is competent. What happen now, they go for a week on the course. They finish the course. They write a test. Now they say, right you are competent, but the training is not really tested.’ (Participant number 1; Male; Station Commander)

Interviewee 4 indicated, from personal experience, that the Station Management Learning Programme, which is regarded as a prescribed course for Station Commanders, did not align sufficiently with the key performance areas of a station commander. Additional challenges are discussed in the sections that ensue.

Four interviewees explained the role and relevance of the Crime Information Management and Analysis Centre (CIMAC) regarding knowledge creation. The Crime Information Analysis Officer (CIAO), based within the CIMAC, is responsible for analysing reported crime and generating crime statistics reports at respective stations. The officer attempts to establish trends or crime patterns regarding the time, days of the week, and possible repeat offenders relevant to the crime by using historical data and crime analysis. However, none of the interviewees mentioned the use of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, such as predictive policing systems, for knowledge creation at respective police stations. Meijer and Wessels (2019) highlight the use of predictive policing models in law enforcement and indicate the need for such models to be refined and tested in the field. Predictive policing has a role to play in SAPS, for instance, forecasting when and where criminal activity is most likely to occur or identifying hotspots in advance.

Meetings conducted within SAPS provide a critical platform for knowledge creation and sharing within the sector. All 10 interviewees elaborated upon the different types of meetings used to create and share knowledge within the sector. The following types of meetings, namely crime combating forums (CCFs), station joint meetings, station lectures and station management meetings, are relevant to knowledge creation at police stations.

Crime combatting forums are crime-focused and include the Station Crime Combatting Forum (SCCF), the Cluster Crime Combatting Forum (CCCF), the Provincial Crime Combatting Forum (PCCF) and the National Crime Combatting Forum (NCCF). Each forum makes provision for engagement at a different level and frequency; for instance, the SCCF meetings are conducted weekly at the respective station and focus on crime within the station’s precinct. Cluster Crime Combatting Forum meetings, consisting of neighbouring stations grouped into clusters, are held weekly or fortnightly.

Significant knowledge is created and shared through monthly station joint meetings convened with external role-players within the community, including private security providers such as Fidelity ADT, local councillors, business managers, representatives from the Community Policing Forum (CPF), law enforcement and local neighbourhood watches. Interviewee 2 affirmed that the station joint meeting provides a good platform for knowledge creation and sharing. Information is shared on relevant crime, as well as hotspots, and new insights are gained owing to the representative nature of the forum. Members attend, brainstorm and collectively propose strategies to combat various crime challenges. In addition, two other types of meetings, namely station lectures and station management meetings, contribute towards knowledge creation and sharing at the station level. New directives and instructions, promulgated within the sector and further communicated during meetings, play a significant role in knowledge creation.

The above- discussed knowledge creation practices indicate that there are numerous formal structures and systems which support knowledge creation within SAPS. Certain practices are consistent with the knowledge creation practices indicated in the literature review. While the underpinning theory for this study indicates that organisations acquire knowledge externally through practices such as benchmarking, hiring consultants or experts, and attending conferences (Park 2007), it is evident that structures such as CCCFs and PCCFs create opportunities for benchmarking:

‘Normally, the chairperson of the cluster meeting is a General. He will allow you to share your best practices. … let’s say I’m compiling my plan … they can see my plan has been submitted and with all the relevant extra detail. Then they will ask the other stations on the cluster to … copy, so yes, sharing best practices.’ (Participant number 4; Male; Station Commander)

The formal structures and systems within SAPS make provision for horizontal and vertical integration in terms of supporting knowledge creation practices within the sector. Hence, the system makes provision for SAPS staff to engage, communicate, and collaborate with each other at station level, and for respective staff to do the same at cluster, provincial, and national levels. Knowledge integration, along with clearly defined organisational roles, is evident in the abovementioned knowledge creation practices and is regarded as a KM enabler, as outlined in the theoretical framework for this study. Contrary to the literature on knowledge creation discussed, none of the interviewees mentioned SAPS employees attending seminars and conferences, when describing the knowledge creation practices within SAPS. Turulja, Cinjarevic and Veselinovic (2021) highlight the importance of knowledge obtained from external parties, such as attending periodic seminars.

Significantly, three of the interviewees expressed the view that a useful source of knowledge creation at police stations was from their communities. One of the three interviewees is quoted as saying:

‘That platform that you always link with the community … that is where the trust that is coming in. Of course, there is no intelligence without the community involved in it ….’ (Participant number 5; Male; Station Commander)

Cowan et al. (2019) consider information that is shared through informal social networks, such as relationships established within the community, to be more detailed, accurate, and timely when compared to information obtained through formal channels, such as police information databases.

Notably, there was no mention during interviews of a community of practice, enabled by relevant social media or instant messaging applications, set up for the purpose of knowledge creation within SAPS. The literature review lists technology-enabled social networks as an enabler of KM. Turulja et al. (2021) indicate that internal as well as cross-organisational and cross-disciplinary networking, through instant messaging applications, facilitates the creation of tacit knowledge. According to Matsuo and Aihara (2022), health care organisations create learning communities which enable professionals from across disciplines to collaborate on important areas, including dementia. Moreover, Bosua and Venkitachalam (2013) highlight the importance of social networks, including subject or knowledge experts, communities of practice (CoPs), and specialist advisors and committees in knowledge creation and transfer.

The above-discussed initiatives, such as the various types of meetings within the sector, collaboration and engagement across station, cluster, provincial and national levels, and knowledge creation through the CIMAC, provide the relevant structures and mechanisms to support the creation of tacit and explicit knowledge through Nonaka’s (1994) SECI model, which is discussed in the theoretical framework. However, the above-discussed limitations pertaining to training and workshops, seminars and conferences, AI technologies, and CoP enabled by social media are likely to hinder the creation of tacit and explicit knowledge within the sector.

Description and critical assessment of knowledge storage practices within the South African Police Service

Figure 3 presents the knowledge storage practices that emerged from the interview data collected at police stations.

FIGURE 3: Factors or variables that enable knowledge storage within South African Police Service.

The following discussion elucidates and critically analyses the knowledge storage practices in SAPS (Figure 3), using the study’s conceptual framework (Figure 1) as a guiding lens.

Many of the interviewees indicated that the respective station’s intranet is the main source for knowledge storage and retrieval at police stations:

‘We mostly use our intranet because we work according to policies and instructions in the police. You go in the intranet, and there’s different processes you can go through, and this is how they source their information, especially your national instructions and your policies … All police members have access to it.’ (Participant number 1; Male; Station Commander)

Interviewee 6 explained that their administration department also stores relevant information or documents on their computer systems. Moreover, several interviewees explained that police stations use an information register to store and share information with respective staff. The register is a physical register kept in the Community Service Centre (CSC), where important information is recorded, such as new instructions or directives from the national and provincial SAPS offices.

Several interviewees explained that the Integrated Case Docket Management System (ICDMS) is an important system within SAPS. The system is used for registering case dockets and for recording, storing, and reporting crime statistics. The system plays a central role as a knowledge repository and enables SAPS to measure and control its performance regarding crime statistics. Notwithstanding the literature listing ‘systems for controlling and measurement’ and ‘knowledge repositories’ as enablers of KM, a major concern is that many interviewees expressed dissatisfaction with the system downtime associated with the ICDMS. The downtime impacts data storage and retrieval and hampers productivity at police stations within SAPS.

The literature indicates that an effective knowledge storage process, which includes codification and retrieval, ensures that knowledge is refined, that is knowledge is contextualised by virtue of the tacit qualities of the knowledge being captured together with the explicit facts whenever possible (Rainer, Prince & Cegielski 2015). Relevant or useful knowledge needs to be stored by utilising appropriate knowledge repositories, which allow for efficient and user-friendly retrieval (Jasimuddin 2012). There are sufficient mechanisms in place for knowledge storage within SAPS, as discussed in the preceding sections. The SAPS codifies or makes explicit the relevant information in the form of instructions and directives prior to storing this information in the relevant knowledge storage repositories, such as the station intranet. This finding is consistent with the above-mentioned literature. However, one interviewee argued that instructions or directives are not always self-explanatory and could be interpreted differently by individuals and, hence, should be ‘trained’ to individuals, as stated next:

‘Sometimes you can get a regulation, and you can read it, and I can read it, and we can get a different view. So obviously for me, it will be better if new regulations is then almost like trained to members, via training at the end of the day, and not given over to a station to say, “Go and sensitise your members.”’ (Participant number 6; Female; Station Commander)

According to Haraldsdóttir (2020), the term ‘personal knowledge registration’ (PKR) is used as a community of practice and a directory for the education, training, and experience of employees within an organisation. Haraldsdóttir (2020) asserts that organisations must be clear regarding the information and knowledge their employees possess, and how much of it must be registered and where. Hence, knowledge seekers know who to ask. The SAPS could benefit from such a directory.

The researcher believes that the above-discussed knowledge storage mechanisms are likely to support knowledge creation through Nonaka’s (1994) SECI model by facilitating the storage of explicit knowledge generated during the externalisation and combination phases of the model. Moreover, the internalisation phase, in which explicit knowledge is converted to tacit knowledge, is likely to benefit from the availability of this explicit knowledge to employees who seek it. However, the system downtime associated with the ICDMS, coupled with instructions or directives not always being clearly understood following codification to an explicit form are likely to hinder knowledge creation through Nonaka’s (1994) SECI model.

Description and critical assessment of knowledge-sharing practices within the South African Police Service

Figure 4 presents the knowledge-sharing practices that emerged from the interview data collected at police stations.

FIGURE 4: Factors or variables that enable knowledge sharing within South African Police Service.

The following discussion elucidates and critically analyses the knowledge-sharing practices in SAPS (Figure 4), using the study’s conceptual framework (Figure 1) as a guiding lens.

Similar to knowledge creation, knowledge is shared through the various types of meetings already discussed under knowledge creation. However, one additional type of meeting, referred to as station parades, which was not mentioned under knowledge creation, was particularly acknowledged by interviewees for playing a significant role in the day-to-day knowledge sharing at police stations:

‘So, every time that we have new group reports for duty, we have a parade. We now share this knowledge through those parades. Info is cascaded on that basis.’ (Participant number 2; Male; Station Commander)

Moreover, Interviewee 4 explained that teamwork contributes to knowledge sharing, as less experienced staff members on the team observe, learn, and gradually acquire some of the tacit knowledge possessed by their more experienced counterparts. Team members are thus empowered and are more likely to acquire the capabilities to eventually lead teams of their own when responding to similar types of crime. Furthermore, several interviewees expressed the view that on-the-job mentoring plays a significant role in terms of acquiring and sharing good practice:

‘I mentor lot of times myself, but I also have a system whereby when we get new entrants or new constables or members, I will put that one under the wing of somebody else, a more experienced person.’ (Participant number 2; Male; Station Commander)

There are numerous formal structures and systems which support knowledge sharing within the SAPS environment, as discussed in the preceding sections. The formal structures and systems make provision for horizontal as well as top-down and bottom-up knowledge-sharing practices within the sector. The SAPS employees can engage, communicate and collaborate with each other at the station, cluster, provincial and national levels. The knowledge acquired by SAPS officials, who attend workshops, training programmes, crime combatting forum meetings and station joint meetings, is shared at the station level using emails, station’s WhatsApp group and the Information Register. Moreover, important information is shared on the respective station’s intranet. The abovementioned practices reflect clearly defined organisational roles, information technology that facilitates communication and knowledge sharing, and, to a lesser extent, technology-enabled social networks – all of which are considered KM enablers, as noted in the literature. Ribeiro-Navarrete et al. (2021) indicate that the use of social networks and social media training for staff contributes positively to company performance.

Notwithstanding the challenges raised by interviewees regarding training within the sector (dealt with under knowledge creation), training and workshops are important platforms within SAPS for sharing knowledge. Moreover, mentoring plays an important role in which more experienced staff members share their knowledge and expertise with staff members. Knowledge sharing within SAPS, through teamwork and mentorship, is a good practice. According to Marnoch (2017), mentors must be embedded within the respective operations that are conducted. Individuals who perform the roles of mentors must identify with and fully comprehend the significance of their role.

Interviewee 6 and Interviewee 8 indicated that many staff members do not read the new legislation or instructions, which are shared through the various platforms described in the preceding sections, thus creating a need for senior officers within SAPS to provide relevant SAPS members with this information during station parades and other meetings. The concerning implication here is that there could be many SAPS employees who do not possess an intimate knowledge of significant operational legislation or instructions.

Moreover, Interviewee 3 indicated that staff members do not share their knowledge with co-workers at their respective stations, seemingly because of their personal goals:

‘I think sometimes members don’t always share. That maybe they will go do a course, and then they don’t share … the reason why they won’t share is, if they share and somebody else got that knowledge when there is a post being advertised.’ (Participant number 3; Female; Station Commander)

Guided by relational theory, Zhang et al. (2015) divided relationships into compulsory bonds, emotional bonds and instrumental bonds. They found that there is a negative correlation between employees’ instrumental bond and the efficiency of tacit knowledge sharing. According to them, an instrumental bond is a relationship based on a primary focus that seeks to achieve goals and is rooted in the principles of fairness and equivalence. Employees who share an instrumental bond will share tacit knowledge with others only if the advantages of doing so outweigh the disadvantages of not doing so. The responses from three interviewees seemingly attribute the reason for staff not openly sharing their knowledge with co-workers to their personal goals. The foregoing statement suggests that an instrumental bond may exist between SAPS staff at many police stations. As such, SAPS staff members would need to be incentivised or rewarded for sharing knowledge. Turyahikayo, Pillay and Muhenda (2021) explain that, in accordance with their research study, some of the public sector employees justify knowledge hoarding as a means to gain and ensure future competitive advantage. They acknowledge that requesting employees to share their knowledge openly without some incentive is counterproductive. The theoretical framework developed for this study identifies employee rewards for knowledge sharing, along with an organisational culture that supports information sharing, as key KM enablers. Consequently, the researcher contends that the apparent absence of a reward structure for knowledge sharing, coupled with a lack of a culture that encourages information sharing, hampers knowledge sharing practices within SAPS.

The literature indicates that both the formal and the informal transfer and sharing of knowledge are significant components of effective knowledge-sharing practices (Cowan et al. 2019; Nakano et al. 2013; Park 2007; Stadler & Fullagar 2016). Concerningly, interviewees commented very little on the informal processes for knowledge sharing within SAPS. This requires further investigation. Notwithstanding the need for SAPS to maintain its formal knowledge sharing structures to facilitate the exchange of tacit and explicit knowledge, Turyahikayo et al. (2021) indicate that informal meetings or gatherings promote socialisation and facilitate the exchange of tacit knowledge. Thus, informal gatherings must be promoted within SAPS.

The above-discussed practices, such as the various types of meetings and teamwork and mentorship initiatives within the sector, provide the relevant mechanisms to support knowledge sharing through Nonaka’s (1994) SECI model by facilitating the sharing of tacit knowledge generated during the internalisation and socialisation phases of the model. However, the limitations relevant to above-discussed informal knowledge practices and staff members who do not openly share their knowledge with co-workers and who do not read relevant new legislation and instructions are likely to hinder the knowledge-sharing efforts within the sector.

Description and critical assessment of knowledge application practices within the South African Police Service

Figure 5 presents the knowledge application practices that emerged from the interview data collected at police stations.

FIGURE 5: Factors or variables that enable knowledge application within South African Police Service.

The following discussion elucidates and critically analyses the knowledge application practices in SAPS (Figure 5), using the study’s conceptual framework (Figure 1) as a guiding lens.

The literature indicates that effective knowledge application processes require that the knowledge be transformed into action by embedding such knowledge within an organisation’s business processes and ensuring that it is reflected within the organisation’s products and services (Chong & Choi 2005). Moreover, Gasik (2011) asserts that organisational routines or processes, guidelines and instructions, and self-organising teams are the main mechanisms that assure the application of knowledge.

The knowledge created within SAPS is documented and embedded in the form of new instructions, directives, or regulations which detail the practices or processes that should be followed. Notably, many interviewees indicated that in-service or on-the-job training and mentorship play a significant role in supporting knowledge application practices at the respective stations. Marnoch (2017) advises that mentors must be embedded within the respective operations that are conducted. Embedding mentors in operational microsystems is an effective way of delivering programmes that build capacity. Moreover, mentors must identify with the role and fully comprehend the significance of the role they are performing.

A concern worth noting is that interviewees raised numerous challenges associated with the implementation of training programmes within SAPS. Quoted assertions incorporate:

• Training programmes offered within the SAPS environment are not competency-based [I1].
• College training is not effective [I8].
• New constables out of college require support and guidance to apply the knowledge at the station level, which they have acquired through training [I9].

The theoretical framework for this study classifies training, education and skills acquisition as enablers of KM. However, the researcher contends that a training approach that does not always ensure that trainees can competently apply the knowledge and skills gained through relevant programmes is likely to hinder knowledge application within SAPS.

Belur et al. (2019) conducted an intensive review of literature on police academies, field training and learning relevant to police recruits. The majority of the studies (74%) they consulted indicated that academic training and field training were offered in separate blocks. The academic and skills component of the training is offered in the training academy, and the field training component in the police force. This is dissimilar to the SAPS environment, in which graduate training is entirely undertaken at the respective police training academy.

Davies and Heysmand (2019) describe a model of leadership training implemented by the South Wales Police Force. Participants were expected to apply the knowledge that they had acquired during the training process to recent or current cases that they were working on. Moreover, embedded within the programme was the need for reflective practice. The learning exercises offered participants the opportunity to reflect on the actions they had taken and provide suggestions on what should have been improved moving forward. Participants indicated that the training programme had a positive influence on their professional and personal development.

Besides the abovementioned challenges experienced with training within SAPS, interviewees raised several other challenges, including a shortage of human and physical resources, which impedes knowledge application at respective stations. Human and physical resources that support KM are certainly enablers of KM practices. Conversely, a shortage of these resources serves as a barrier to effective KM practices.

Crime-analysis-driven operations, training and on-the-job mentorship, and operations being driven through explicitly codified instructions, directives, and action plans are likely to support knowledge application within SAPS through Nonaka’s (1994) SECI model. The newly created explicit knowledge, which is generated through the previous stage of combination in the abovementioned model, is now internalised, thus taking the form of tacit knowledge at individual, group, or organisational levels. However, the limitations indicated, including the challenges related to training programmes and a shortage of human and physical resources, including police motor vehicles, are likely to hinder the knowledge application efforts within the sector.

The preceding sections have outlined and critically analysed the knowledge creation, storage, sharing, and application processes within SAPS, thereby responding to RQ1 and RQ2.

Knowledge management practices identified as good or best practice (addresses RQ₃)

The following discussion, which responds to RQ3, elucidates the KM practices, which interviewees construed as good or best practices, at respective stations. Such KM practices would not be perceived as the norm at police stations in general.

Leadership as an enabler of knowledge management

According to Interviewee 2 and Interviewee 9, good practice involves station leadership serving as an enabler of KM by consistently using various platforms or types of meetings, such as parades, station lectures and SCCFs, to encourage and motivate staff, thereby fostering an organisational climate that promotes positive attitudes and commitment towards the profession. Such an environment would ensure that SAPS employees remain passionate. Thus, they are motivated to seek relevant training and professional development, enhance their performance and competently apply the knowledge they have acquired.

Knowledge application ensuring an effectively managed Community Service Centre

Interviewee 2 emphasised that the knowledge application process must ensure that the CSC, at a police station, is effectively managed, given the pivotal role that the CSC plays in providing service to the community. Moreover, crimes and complaints are reported and communicated through the CSC. Protective gear, including firearms, is handed out and collected, and financial transactions are also administered within the CSC. Interviewee 2 expressed that it is imperative that a relevant senior official, such as the Relief Commander, be delegated the authority to manage the operations within the CSC. The respective senior official ensures that the relevant procedures and control measures are being complied with at the CSC and that the Station Commander is immediately updated should the need arise.

Knowledge creation and sharing through collaboration at the cluster level

Police stations can benefit from positive collaboration at the cluster level. The responses from Interviewees 4 and 9 indicated that neighbouring police stations must share crime intelligence and best practices and assist each other with resources.

Knowledge creation through the station’s relationship and engagement with the community

Three interviewees (I5, I7, and I9) alluded to building relationships within the communities they serve as important to knowledge acquisition. The following is a synthesis of the responses from the above-stated three interviewees. Getting to know the community and building trust with community members play a major role in crime prevention and response. The linkages and interactions which a station develops within the community are significant in enhancing operational service performance at a police station. Strong community engagement provides the police station with critical intelligence. Once trust is built, community members are more forthcoming in reporting issues to respective senior SAPS officials, such as matters pertaining to corrupt SAPS officers. In the majority of cases regarding contact crime, the cases in court lead to successful prosecution when the relevant community members come forth and provide evidence.

According to Interviewee 5, drug lords wield tremendous power and influence in communities because of their purported acts of benevolence or philanthropy. The researcher believes that a police station must wield greater influence in a community than the drug dealers and crime syndicates operating in that community. It is critical that the behaviour and actions of SAPS members contribute towards building trust and forging good relationships within the communities that they serve. Moreover, the awareness campaigns organised by SAPS within communities must be able to get the message through that drugs destroy lives and communities. Drug lords and dealers are not our friends and should not be shielded.

The preceding discussion elucidated the KM practices that interviewees construed as good or best practices at police stations, thereby addressing RQ3.

Key factors or variables that enable knowledge management processes within the South African Police Service (addresses RQ₄)

This section responds to RQ4. Based on the critical assessment of KM practices, as well as the good or best practices relevant to KM processes within SAPS, the key factors or variables that enable the respective KM processes are outlined as follows:

• Relevant workshops and training programmes conducted within SAPS.
• Crime analysis reporting through the CIMAC at police stations.
• Regular meetings conducted, including the various crime-combating forum meetings, station joint meetings, station lectures, station management meetings and station parades.
• Relations with the community built on mutual trust, including a network of informants from within the community.
• Station intranet as a key mechanism for knowledge storage.
• Accurate recording of case dockets and crime statistics on the ICDMS.
• Effective mentoring programmes at the station level.
• Teamwork at the station level.
• Crime-analysis-driven operations at the station level.
• Leadership that instils a positive attitude and passion among staff.
• An effectively managed CSC.
• Effective collaboration between stations at the cluster level.

The above-identified factors as enabling the respective KM processes within SAPS, namely knowledge creation, storage, sharing and application, generally align with the enablers and practices outlined in the study’s conceptual framework. The preceding discussion responds to RQ4.

Conclusion

The introductory section of this study highlights the general lack of KM research in the public sector. It mentions the need for research that creates awareness among public sector employees regarding the contribution of KM practices, as well as the factors or enablers that contribute to the successful implementation of KM within their respective organisations. Moreover, the researcher posited that there is a lack of research that critically assesses the KM processes within SAPS. The current study contributes to addressing the abovementioned gaps in KM research by fulfilling its research objective, which was to conduct a critical assessment of the KM processes and to identify the key enablers of these processes, using SAPS, a public sector organisation in the Western Cape, as a case study. The research objective was fulfilled by addressing the four research questions that guided the study. Given that the study was conducted within SAPS in the Western Cape, a limitation is that the research findings cannot be generalised to other regions or public service organisations. However, the theoretical and conceptual frameworks relevant to this study provide the theoretical underpinning and analytical lens to guide public sector organisations globally, including police services, to evaluate their KM processes. Critically assessing KM practices to identify their benefits and key enablers is likely to foster greater employee engagement in these initiatives within organisations.

Important enablers of KM processes identified within SAPS include collaboration and engagement across station, cluster, provincial and national levels; a network of community informants; teamwork and on-the-job mentoring; crime-analysis-driven operations; and documented organisational processes, guidelines and instructions.

The following recommendations are made to guide KM practitioners within SAPS in improving KM practices in the sector:

• The SAPS employees at the station level must attend periodic seminars and conferences on pertinent topics and practices, which are presented by subject experts or leading practitioners in the relevant knowledge area. Topics should address knowledge creation in the areas of core operational service, such as intelligence-driven policing activities related to drugs and gangs, and case docket and case flow management processes.
• A system of competency-based training must be implemented. Trainees, including new recruits or constables, who attend training at the SAPS’ training colleges, must apply the relevant aspects of the training within the work environment upon their return to the station and thereafter submit a portfolio of evidence to the training instructor for assessment purposes. The mentorship programme at respective police stations must provide relevant support to trainees when they are compiling a portfolio of evidence. Moreover, training programmes must address the key performance areas that SAPS employees are measured on.
• The SAPS must implement relevant AI technology, which supports predictive policing, for forecasting where criminal activity is most likely to occur or identifying hotspots in advance.
• Opportunities for informal knowledge-sharing practices must be created within the sector. Internal as well as cross-organisational networking, through a community of practice, enabled by instant messaging applications, would be a good place to start.
• The SAPS leadership at police stations must strive towards creating a knowledge-sharing culture. Team culture and orientation must be moulded towards a collaborative approach in which members trust each other and openly share knowledge. Team goals must be emphasised. Managers and supervisors must lead the way by openly sharing experiential knowledge with staff. Knowledge seekers must be encouraged to seek knowledge from those who possess the requisite knowledge. Knowledge providers must be acknowledged and rewarded for sharing knowledge. Hence, the performance management system within SAPS must make provision to reward employees who share relevant knowledge.

In terms of further research, the study highlighted several challenges related to the implementation of training within the sector and the need for SAPS to implement a system of competency-based training. Hence, further research could be directed towards developing a model for a competency-based training system within SAPS. The research findings also highlighted the need for SAPS to implement AI technologies that support predictive policing. The implementation of AI within SAPS is an area that would benefit from further research.

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the assistance received from Senior South African Police Service officials at the national and provincial offices, who provided them with the relevant support and access so that they could conduct their study within the sector. Moreover, the authors wish to thank the research participants for their commitment and support towards the study.

This article includes content that overlaps with research originally conducted as part of Mohamed A. Badat’s doctoral thesis titled ‘The impact of knowledge management processes on core operational service performance within the South African Police Service in the Western Cape’, submitted to the School of Business Leadership, University of South Africa (UNISA) in 2024. The thesis was supervised by Professor Visvanathan Naicker. Portions of the data, analysis, and discussion have been revised, updated, and adapted for journal publication. The authors affirm that this submission complies with ethical standards for secondary publication, and appropriate acknowledgement has been made to the original work.

The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationships that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.

Mohamed A. Badat: Conceptualisation, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Visualisation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Visvanathan Naicker: Supervision, Writing – original draft. Both the authors reviewed the article, contributed to the discussion of results, approved the final version for submission and publication, and take responsibility for the integrity of its findings.

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

The data that supports the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, Mohamed A. Badat, upon reasonable request.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and are the product of professional research. It does not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated institution, funder, agency or that of the publisher. The authors are responsible for this article’s results, findings and content.

References