Design of a Knowledge Management Model for Leveraging Evaluative Data Generated by Regulatory Bodies Overseeing Public Policies in Iran

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Public Administration & Public Policy Making, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Assistant Prof., Department of Public Administration & Public Policy Making, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.

3 Prof., Department of Public Administration & Public Policy Making, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.

10.22059/jipa.2024.384467.3596

Abstract

Objective
In complex governance systems, policy evaluation serves as a cornerstone of evidence-based policymaking and continuous improvement. However, in the context of Iran, the effectiveness of policy evaluation has been significantly constrained by fragmented oversight structures, institutional silos, and the absence of a coordinated knowledge-sharing mechanism. These issues have limited the strategic use of evaluation outputs, reducing their potential to inform learning, accountability, and reform. This study seeks to conceptualize and develop a comprehensive knowledge management (KM) model specifically tailored to the evaluative needs and institutional landscape of Iran’s supervisory bodies. The model aims to bridge inter-institutional gaps, mitigate knowledge fragmentation, promote cross-organizational learning, and enhance the transparency and responsiveness of the policy process.
Methods
This research adopted a qualitative design grounded in thematic analysis, utilizing Braun and Clarke’s six-phase framework for data interpretation. The empirical foundation of the study was based on 20 semi-structured interviews with policy evaluation experts and senior practitioners across Iran’s principal oversight organizations. To establish a conceptual foundation, a systematic literature review was conducted in advance using the Silva et al. (2012) approach, examining international best practices and foundational KM dimensions in public sector evaluation. The combined insights from the literature and empirical data were analyzed through iterative coding, yielding 27 thematic codes, which were subsequently consolidated into eight core constructs forming the basis of the proposed KM model.
Results
The thematic synthesis revealed eight critical dimensions for effective knowledge management in the context of policy evaluation:

Knowledge creation, acquisition, and structuring
Dissemination, transfer, and practical utilization of knowledge
Knowledge retention mechanisms and feedback loops
Infrastructural readiness, including digital platforms and organizational enablers
Participatory engagement and collaborative mechanisms across institutions
Strategic alignment with external knowledge sources, including think tanks and universities
Institutional and legal enablers, such as human capital development and regulatory coherence
Data security and information governance protocols

Comparative case analyses of international entities—such as the Government Accountability Office (GAO) in the U.S., the National Audit Office (NAO) in the U.K., and Australia’s Productivity Commission—demonstrate how integrated KM systems can enhance coherence in policy evaluation, reduce duplication, and strengthen learning across government. These global benchmarks offer practical insights for Iran’s transition from reactive evaluation systems to proactive, knowledge-driven governance.
Conclusion
The proposed Knowledge Management Model for Policy Evaluation offers a context-sensitive and operationally grounded framework for institutionalizing knowledge flows across Iran’s oversight ecosystem. The model advocates for embedding KM functions into evaluation processes, establishing dedicated KM units, investing in interoperable digital infrastructure, and adopting a national KM strategy that mandates inter-agency collaboration and periodic peer learning. Additionally, the study emphasizes the necessity of cultivating a knowledge-oriented organizational culture, driven by leadership commitment, stakeholder inclusion, and incentive structures. Such reforms can significantly elevate the quality of governance, policy coherence, and institutional transparency. Future research should explore the long-term implementation of KM frameworks across diverse administrative contexts and assess their impact on public sector innovation and accountability.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

 
Alavi, M. & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Review: Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly, 25 (1), 107-136. https://doi.org/10.2307/3250961
Al-Busaidi, K. A. & Olfman, L. (2017). Knowledge sharing through inter-organizational knowledge sharing systems. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, 47(1), 110-136. https://doi.org/10.1108/VJIKMS-05-2016-0019
Ali, N., Mustaffa, M. M., Alkawsi, G. & Capretz, L. F. (2024). If you build it, will they come? Exploring the success factors of knowledge management systems in the Malaysian public sector. Heliyon, 10(4), e27093. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e27093
Alkin, M. C. & King, J. A. (2016). The historical development of evaluation use. American Journal of Evaluation, 37(4), 568-579.
Alvani, S. M. & Sharifzadeh, F. (2017). The Public Policy Making Process. Tehran, Allameh Tabatabaei University. (in Persian)
Argote, L. & Ingram, P. (2000). Knowledge transfer: A basis for competitive advantage in firms. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 150-169.
Australian Department of Industry, Science and Resources. (2024). Review of the Australian Government's Evaluation Strategy. https://www.industry.gov.au/publications/evaluation-strategy-2024-2028
Bannister, F. & Connolly, R. (2014). ICT, public values and transformative government: A framework and programme for research. Government Information Quarterly, 31(1), 119-128.
Baskerville, R. & Siponen, M. (2002). An information security meta‐policy for emergent organizations. Logistics information management, 15(5/6), 337-346.
 Borrás, S. & Edquist, C. (2013). The choice of innovation policy instruments. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(8), 1513-1522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.03.002
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2012). Thematic analysis. In H. Cooper, P. M. Camic, D. L. Long, A. T. Panter, D. Rindskopf & K. J. Sher (Eds.), APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol. 2: Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological (pp. 57-71). American Psychological Association.
Choo, C. W. (1996). The knowing organization: How organizations use information to construct meaning, create knowledge, and make decisions. International Journal of Information Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/0268-4012(96)00020-5
Coakes, E. (2006). Storing and sharing knowledge: Supporting the management of knowledge made explicit in transnational organisations. The Learning Organization, 13(6), 579-593.
Davenport, T. H. & Prusak, L. (1998). Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know. Harvard Business Press. DOI:10.1145/348772.348775
Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Springer Science & Business Media.
Donaldson, S. I. & LaVelle, J. (2010). University-based evaluation training programs in the United States 1980-2008: An empirical examination. American Journal of Evaluation, 31 (1), 9-23.
Drucker, P. F. (1993). Post-Capitalist Society. Harper & Row.
Dunlop, C. A. & Radaelli, C. M. (2013). Systematising policy learning: From monolith to dimensions. Political Studies, 61(3), 599-619. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2012.00982.x
Dyer, J. H. & Nobeoka, K. (2000). Creating and managing a high-performance knowledge-sharing network: The Toyota case. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 345-367.
Ebrahimi Kiasari, H., Alvani, S. M. & Memarzadeh Tehran, G. (2023). Combinational Assessment of the Factors Affecting Public Participation in Iranian Educational Policies. Journal of Public Administration, 15(2), 230-257. doi: 10.22059/jipa.2023.351493.3247 (in Persian)
Ebrahimikiasari, H. , Alvani, S. M. and Memarzadeh, G. (2023). Designing Public Participation Model in Iranian Educational Policies by Multi-Method Orientation. Strategic Studies of public policy, 13(46), 66-93. doi: 10.22034/sspp.2023.562459.3291 (in Persian)
Evers, H. D. & Menkhoff, T. (2004). Expert knowledge and the role of consultants in an emerging knowledge-based economy. Human Systems Management, 23 (2), 123-135. https://doi.org/10.3233/HSM-2004-23201
Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2012). Enacting electronic government success. Springer Science & Business Media.
Government Accountability Office. (2023). Knowledge management in public sector evaluations. GAO Reports. Available at: https://www.gao.gov/assets/d24900483.pdf
Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2), 109-122.
Harkins, S. S. & Harkins, W. H. (2006). The debtors colony (Building America). Mitchell Lane Publishers.ISBN-10:‎1584154659
Heikkila, T. & Gerlak, A. K. (2013). Building a conceptual approach to collective learning: Lessons for public policy scholars. Policy Studies Journal, 41 (3), 484-512. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/psj.12026
Hislop, D. (2013). Knowledge management in organizations: A critical introduction. Oxford University Press. ISBN: 9780199691937
Hogan, R. L. (2007). The historical development of program evaluation: Exploring the past and present. Online Journal of Workforce Education and Development, 2(4), 1-14. Available at: https://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/ojwed/vol2/iss4/5
Hornblower, L. R. (2011). Outsourcing Fraud Detection: The Analyst as Dodd-Frank Whistleblower, Journal of Business & Technology Law, 287-326. Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/jbtl/vol6/iss2/2
Inkpen, A. C. & Tsang, E. W. K. (2005). Social capital, networks, and knowledge transfer. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 146-165.
Islamic Consultative Assembly Research Center (2023). Survey of the institutions responsible for combating corruption in the Islamic Republic of Iran (1) Institutional mapping. Serial number 19180, subject code 290 (in Persian)
Johansson, M. (2016). A national cyber security strategy. Ministry of Justice. Available at: https://www.government.se/contentassets/d87287e088834d9e8c08f28d0b9dda5b/a-national-cyber-security-strategy-skr.-201617213
Karlsson, F., Frostenson, M., Prenkert, F., Kolkowska, E. & Helin, S. (2017). Inter-organisational information sharing in the public sector: A longitudinal case study on the reshaping of success factors. Government Information Quarterly, 34(4), 567-577. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2017.10.007
Loebbecke, C., van Fenema, P.C. & Powell, P. (2016) Managing inter-organizational knowledge sharing. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 25 (1), 4-14. ISSN 0963-8687.
McKenzie, J., van Winkelen, C. & Grewal, S. (2017). Developing organisational decision-making capability: A knowledge manager's guide. Journal of Knowledge Management, 15(3), 403-421. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13673271111137402
Menkhoff, T., Wah, C. Y., Loh, B. & Evers, H. (2006, January). Encouraging knowledge sharing in knowledge-based organizations: individual and organizational aspects of knowledge management leadership. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'06) (Vol. 7, pp. 153c-153c). IEEE.
Monavvarian, A. & Kasaei, M. (2007). A KM model for public administration: The case of Labour Ministry. Vine, 37(3), 348-367. https://doi.org/10.1108/03055720710731772
National Audit Office (2011). Evaluation in government. National Audit Office. Available at: https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/10331-001-Evaluation-in-government_NEW.pdf
Newman, J., Cherney, A. & Head, B. W. (2017). Policy capacity and evidence-based policy in the public service. Public Management Review, 19 (2), 157-174. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2016.1148191
Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Harvard Business Review Classics. ISBN 0195092694.
OECD (2024). Recommendation of the Council on Public Policy Evaluation, OECD/ LEGAL/0478. Available at: https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD- LEGAL-0478
Office of the Auditor General of Canada. (2024). Transparency: OAGC Reports. Available at: https://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/pd_fs_e_944.html
Peters, B. G. & Pierre, J. (2006). Handbook of public policy. SAGE Publications. ISBN-10 0-7619-4061-8
Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W. & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 116-145.
Radaelli, C. M. (2018). Halfway through the better regulation strategy of the Juncker Commission: What does the evidence say? Journal of Common Market Studies. 56 (S1), 85-95. DOI: 10.1111/jcms.12768
Rashman, L. & Hartley, J. (2002). Leading and learning: Knowledge transfer in the Beacon Council Scheme. Public Administration, 80 (3), 523-542. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9299.00316
Sager, F. & Rissi, C. (2011). The limited scope of policy appraisal in the context of long-term policy problems: A case study on the evaluation of large-scale transport infrastructure in Switzerland. Evaluation, 17 (1), 19-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1356389011401612
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-0-470-18586-5
Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D. & Leviton, L. C. (1990). Foundations of program evaluation: Theories of practice. SAGE Publications. ISBN-10: 0803953011
Silva, V., Grande, A. J., Martimbianco, A. L. C., Riera, R. & Carvalho, A. P. V. (2012). Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study: part I: why and for whom? Sao Paulo Medical Journal, 130(6), 398-404. doi:10.1590/s1516-31802012000600007
Spender, J. C. (1996). Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2), 45-62.
Tangestani, M.Gh. (2012). Legal System of Coordination and Regulation of Relations between the Court of Accounts and the General Inspectorate of the Republic. Journal of Judicial Research, No. 12. (in Persian)
Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat. (2016). Policy on Results. Available at: https://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=31300
UK Government. (2024). What Works Network: Evidence for decision makers. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/what-works-network
Weick, K. E. & Roberts, K. H. (1993). Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(3), 357-381.
Journal of Public Administration
Volume 17, Issue 3
2025
Pages 583-612

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics