International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management

Volume 7 Issue 4 October-December 2016

Knowledge Sharing Using Web 2.0:

Preferences, Benefits and Barriers in
Brunei Darussalams Tertiary Education
Nurul Afiqah Hj Nor Amin, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei
Amy Suliza Hasnan, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei
Nurul Nazira Besar, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei
Mohammad Nabil Almunawar, Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei

ABSTRACT
The purpose of this paper is to assess the current knowledge sharing processes in tertiary education in
Brunei Darussalam and identify the preferred knowledge sharing activities as well as preferred online
applications for the purpose. This study also examined the benefits and barriers of using Web 2.0 as
a knowledge sharing platform in tertiary education. A descriptive research method is employed, in
which quantitative approach was selected to collect data on the use of Web 2.0 tools for knowledge
sharing in tertiary education. This study revealed that respondents highly utilize emails and Web
2.0 applications for knowledge sharing, which are normally provided by their host universities as
information and knowledge sharing platforms. Web 2.0 applications, especially social networks, are
considered good platforms for sharing knowledge. However, there are some concerns in using Web
2.0 applications for knowledge sharing, mainly in term of privacy issues and reliability of information
and knowledge shared due to its high risk of collaborators.
Keywords
Knowledge Sharing, Knowledge Sharing Preference, Tertiary Education, Web 2.0, Knowledge Sharing Platform

1. INTRODUCTION
Information and Communication Technology (ICT), especially the Intenet and its Web 2.0
technologies, has created a new learning environment and experience for many people of all ages,
no matter where their whereabouts (Pieri, 2013). Web 2.0 was first coined by Tim OReilly and Dale
Dougherty in 2004 as a second generation internet services. Web 2.0 comprises tools or applications
which allow individual and collective publishing and this include images, audio and video sharing
and also the formation and maintenance of online social networks (Bennett et al, 2012). Web 2.0
enables content sharing, collaboration, and communication among users all over the world as well
as let users to produce contents. Examples of Web 2.0 applications are wiki, blogs, Google docs,
Skype, Facebook, Twitters and WhatsApp.
Web 2.0 applications, especially social networks such as Facebook and Twitters, are very popular
and globally adopted by many people and these applications are now part of everyday lives of many
people including students. Nowadays, many students, especially university students, utilize Web 2.0
applications in enhancing their learning in both individual and collaborative learning activities. This
DOI: 10.4018/IJABIM.2016100101
Copyright 2016, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management

Volume 7 Issue 4 October-December 2016

was further supported by Kulakli and Mahony (2014) in which they stated that, the advancement of
technologies in the educational field has brought new opportunities to higher education institutions
where it improves teaching and learning experiences specifically in terms of knowledge and
information sharing.
A study conducted by Bennett et al. (2012), showed the importance of implementing Web 2.0 in
developing students skills in which they can be gained through participation, user generated content
and collaboration. Hence, Web 2.0 serves as an innovative communication platform which encourages
students to share their thoughts and experiences through interactive social media and these help to
leverage improvements at all levels.
The adoption of Web 2.0 applications has increased their use in both by students and lecturers
thus have opportunities to be highly utilized in tertiary education for learning, although there are
some concerns that need to be addressed properly. This paper discusses the preferences of Web 2.0
technologies, its benefits and barriers in Brunei Darussalam tertiary education.
Our main objective is to answer the following research question: how Web 2.0 based collaborative
tools affects activities in sharing and knowledge aspect?
A tertiary institution usually involves a number of stakeholders such as lecturers, professors,
students and administrations. One form of communication and knowledge sharing by the stakeholders
in a tertiary education is by the use of Web 2.0 applications. Therefore it is important to know the
utilisation of Web 2.0 in tertiary education to achieve an effective and efficient knowledge sharing
environment. This study will help users of Web 2.0 in tertiary education in Brunei Darussalam. It
provides preferred current Web 2.0 sharing platforms, the benefits and barriers of using Web 2.0
applications to further improve the use of Web 2.0 while overcoming the barriers that this study
established.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. The next section is the literature review followed
by the methodology. We then discuss the findings. The last parts of the paper are the conclusion,
limitation of the study and recommendation for future studies.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
The literature review of this study encompassed of four sections which started with ICT initiatives
in Brunei Darussalam education, knowledge creation and sharing, Web 2.0 as a knowledge sharing
platform and the benefits and barriers of using Web 2.0 for knowledge sharing.
2.1. ICT Initiatives in Brunei Darussalam Education
The first basic structure of the education system in Brunei Darussalam was mandated in the first
National Development Plan (1954-1959) encompassed of primary education, lower secondary and
upper secondary. A more comprehensive education that involved tertiary education evolved with the
implemented of Bilingual Education Policy in 1985 whereby education started with primary level,
secondary level, pre-university and post-secondary training or vocational and technical education.
Universiti Brunei Darussalam, Institute of Technology Brunei, technical and engineering schools,
Wasan Vocational School, Universiti Islam Sultan Sharif Ali, Brunei Polytechnic are the tertiary
educational institutions that were established to provide post-secondary and tertiary education in
Brunei.
With the global importance of the development of ICT, Computer Studies and Design and
Technology were introduced in the secondary level of education in 1993 and 2002 respectively.
Some educational services were even upgraded by incorporating teaching and learning of ICT across
the curriculum by providing e-education such as Edunet, E-learning, Education Information and
Digital Library and Human Capacity Building under the Ministry of Education (Oxford Business
Group, 2011). It was stated by Joia (2000) that the usage of ICT in teaching and learning activities
will produce individuals that can be counted as intellectual capacity for the society. This is in line
2

International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management

Volume 7 Issue 4 October-December 2016

with an interview with a school principal whereby the implementation of e-education has led to
knowledge construction whereby students themselves are actively seeking knowledge to develop
and communicate it (Siti Norbayu, personal communication, May 9, 2014). Apart from that, benefit
of integrating ICT also include the knowledge and familiarity of new technologies as an important
dimension of employability in the information society and the usage of ICT will improve the quality
of educational experience by providing favorable environment for learning (Afzaal, 2012).
2.2. Knowledge Creation and Sharing
ICT has an important role in supporting knowledge creation and sharing in modern organizations.
ICT has made organizations easier to acquire, store, or disseminate knowledge, hence facilitating
sharing and integration of knowledge. Knowledge creation and sharing is defined as the generation,
storing, representation and sharing of knowledge to the benefit of the organization and its individuals to
ensure comprehensive and understandable management initiatives and procedures in the organization
(Bell, 2001, pp. 49). Organization however demands a challenging task of deciding the type of ICT
solutions to deploy in support of their knowledge management initiatives. This is because, according
to Shannon and Weaver (1949), knowledge sharing in information technology sometimes undergoes
problems in its technical, semantic and effectiveness aspects. Other than these aspects, Ardichvili
et al. (2003) pointed out the human component of knowledge management is an important aspect in
determining success of knowledge initiative in ICT as the initiative should be stimulated by actively
participating members - thereby creating virtual knowledge-sharing communities.
Initially, knowledge management is considered to be a part of communication technology that
involves networks of computers but an increased understanding of the principles of knowledge
creation and sharing within organization has led to new awareness for the management of knowledge
(Birkinshaw, 2001; Hansen et al., 1999; Soo et al., 2002). According to Parket et al. (2001), people
are more likely to turn to a person for information than to an impersonal source such as a database
or a file cabinet. Research done by Birkinshaw (2001), Forsgren et al. (2000), and Meso and Smith
(2000) reveal that the need for leveraging knowledge management in an organization is an important
mechanism to facilitate and support interaction among individuals in corporations and business units.
This shows that in a knowledge intensive work, relationships between people are critical in obtaining
information, learning and solving problems.
Other than corporations and business units, a knowledge-based organization especially in the
education sector has made learning through knowledge creation and sharing become a crucial factor.
Bhatt (2000) mentions the knowledge creation process as a continuous and cumulative learning
process in which knowledge is gained throughout the process. Senge (1990) and Storey and Kelly
(2002) define the process as recognizing useful data and information that are able to transform it
through some processes that are valuable for the organization future. Through this process quality of
knowledge can be obtained in the mean of flexible, creative and future-oriented knowledge creation
process in a network. This process can be shown in Huang and Liaw (2004) knowledge creation and
sharing process framework shown in Figure 1.
Many researches such as conducted by Choi and Lee (2002), Huang and Liaw (2004) and
Malhotra, (2000) used Nonaka and Takeuchis (1995) conceptual framework on knowledge creation
and sharing process between tacit and explicit knowledge by four different modes. The continuous
knowledge creation between these modes affects new knowledge hence creating new knowledge. The
transformation processes depicted in Figure 1 are explained below.
1. Externalization is a process to justify tacit knowledge and express its concept and formal models.
Therefore it involves the conversion of tacit into explicit knowledge. Examples of this process
are commentary, narration or write instruction manuals.
2. Combination is a process that enables explicit knowledge collected from inside or outside
the organization to be combined, edited, integrated processed to form a new knowledge and
3

International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management

Volume 7 Issue 4 October-December 2016

Figure 1. Knowledge creation and sharing process framework of Huang and Liaw (2004)

disseminated it to all individuals and members using communication networks. For example,
course materials and syllabus are shared among teachers and students.
3. Internalization is a process when knowledge is created and shared through an online learning
community and delivers by an individual. This involves internalizing explicit knowledge into
tacit knowledge. Example of internalization is reading course materials and having test online.
4. Socialization is a process that involves social and cultural activities such as discussion and
informal meetings. Therefore socialization is sharing experiences from tacit knowledge to tacit
knowledge.
Some other paradigms of knowledge sharing are discussed by Pusurinkum (2006), Sirirat (2008)
and Auttawutikul (2008). They state that the components include the people who have the same
objective in knowledge sharing such as information, skill, experience and intellect that relate and is
suitable for knowledge sharing. Moreover, the people used various types of technologies used for
knowledge sharing support which must be well-selected for suitable activity of knowledge sharing.
2.3. Web 2.0 as a Knowledge Sharing Platform
According to Patrick and Dotsika (2007), social software is seen as one of the components of Web 2.0.
The Web 2.0 is a new a concept of the web which allows easy creation of websites that improve the
sharing of knowledge and services. Social software of Web 2.0 is also more collaborative, interactive
and dynamic. Boutin (2006) describes Web 2.0 as a platform for interacting with content, reflecting
a set of online tools that enables the aggregation and remixing of content, through interfaces that
combine content from different sources in a manner not possible through a single domain. In simple
words, Web 2.0 is a web based platform which allows users to gain access, contribute, tag, annotate
and bookmark web mediated content in various formats such as text, video, audio, pictures and graphs
(Macaskill & Owen, 2006).
Web 2.0 differs from Web 1.0 in such a way that even those who have minimal web skills can
contribute and use Web 2.0 easily. With the existence of Web 2.0 tools and its availability to be use
on mobile devices, many universities have considered using Web 2.0 as a knowledge sharing platform
for their students and lecturers especially since students frequently use online social networking sites
4

International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management

Volume 7 Issue 4 October-December 2016

(Horizon Report, 2010). As stated by Hargadon (2008), Web 2.0 is the future of education and it can
be seen that Web 2.0 platforms have an emerging role to transform teaching and learning (Alexander
& Levine, 2002). According to Balubaid (2012), some literature had agreed that the Web 2.0 use in
education has been surprisingly increasing. Web 2.0 tools are widely used by colleges to improve
communication and knowledge sharing with the students and staff and even for outreach services
among the college.
According to Balubaid (2012) several examples of Web 2.0 websites that are popular and widely
utilize includes YouTube, Facebook, Google Plus and Twitter. These applications allow users to create,
describe, post, search, collaborate, share and communicate online content in various formats such
as video, audio, pictures and etc. According to a study done by Eyyam et al (2011), the community
in the institutes are more likely to use instant messaging software as to increase interaction between
teachers and students hence to support teaching in comparison to social networks and Wiki. Social
technologies also have a collaborative work not only among students but with colleagues, students
and community members from around the world (Grosseck, 2009). Similar finding by Goktalay and
Ozdilek (2010) stated that adequate technical resources, social networks and the use of audio and
video conferencing technology can supplement class learning.
The following are some examples of popular Web 2.0 applications.
2.3.1. Google Plus (Google+)
Google plus is a multilingual social networking and identity tool owned and operated by Google Inc.
It is different from the other conservative social network which can only be accessed through a single
website. Google plus as described by Google is a social layer which consisted of not just a single
site but rather an all-encompassing layer which covers many of its online properties such as Google
Drive, Gmail, Google Play, Google maps and etc. With Google Plus, users are able to selectively
share their personal network with specific circles of people or groups.
2.3.2. Facebook
Facebook was created by Mark Zuckerberg in February 2004 as a social networking website for the
college students to stay in touch among each other. With Facebook, students, staff and faculty get
to know other people on the campus and exchange their information as well as views on university
policies, events and so on (Philip, 2007). Years after, the websites became open to public use hence
increasing the number of users using the websites for academic purposes (Kosik, 2006). Facebook
also allows it users to create groups for academic courses in which users can discuss and post pictures,
videos and notes. Research done by Tyagi (2012) shows that most of the faculty members used
Facebook to be engaged in collaborative and cooperative work.
2.3.3. YouTube
YouTube is a video sharing website created by former PayPal employees in February 2005. With
YouTube, users can upload, view and share videos. Users can also leave comments in other videos.
Academically, YouTube has served as an effective online tool to share video for learning purposes as
well as demonstration videos which everyone can watch and learn from. Balcikanli (2009) also agrees
that for academic purposes, YouTube has served as the excellent platform for knowledge sharing
between academic departments and students where information about an academic department such as
location, module registration method of a university or college can be share in the YouTube. Lectures
can also be delivered to students by uploading lectures videos to YouTube for students to access.
2.4. Benefits and Barriers of Using Web 2.0 in Organizations
Web 2.0 applications can have a powerful influence to any organization when used effectively. It
offers several benefits to people and organization in terms of increasing interactivity for example;
it brings employees into daily contact and at a lower cost. Hence, effective interaction is one of the
5

International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management

Volume 7 Issue 4 October-December 2016

many benefits offered by Web 2.0 usages in which it helps to enhance communication between people
in organizations (Bughin et al., 2009). Adding to that, interaction helps to encourage participation in
projects and greater ability to share ideas and thus, expanding companys pool of knowledge. This has
led to greater gain of benefits to the company itself such as in producing more effective marketing,
better access to knowledge and lower cost of doing business.
Web 2.0 applications also create opportunities for collaborations which enable knowledge to
spread easier and more effectively. Blogs and social networks are regarded as important means of
exchanging knowledge within the company (Bughin et al., 2009). Moreover, according to study by
Kulakli and Mahony (2014), the growing interests of Web 2.0 technologies help higher institutions to
adapt Web 2.0 as supplementary communication and collaboration medium. Furthermore, a research
by Aworuwa et al. (2009) and Tyagi (2012) shows that interaction, communication and collaboration
are considered crucial in teaching and learning hence, the usage of Web 2.0 in knowledge and sharing
helps to build sense of community, enhance interaction and communication among the lecturers and
students and promote collaboration and resource sharing. Similar finding by Ward et al. (2009) also
shows that majority of students has a positive experience with collaborative writings such as comment
and edit others contributions to group work.
Other important benefits that can be gained from the adaptation of Web 2.0 are improving
technological skills and also increase flexibility and ease of use. The ease of use and its flexibility of
Web 2.0 helps to eliminate time constraints in learning environment (Yun-Jo, et.al, 2009). Moreover,
Web 2.0 is seen to have interactive learning features and it is easily can be up to date on related topic
of interest (Tyagi, 2012). As such, benefits of Web 2.0 usages will then lead to several advantages to
students such as increases their motivation, improve students learning, enhance multi skill development
and also initiate further collaborative working.
However, there are several barriers associated with Web 2.0 usages in organizations. One of the
barriers of Web 2.0 usages is adapting to changes. The use and implementation of Web 2.0 technologies
requires organizations to adjust to such changes hence, they need to embrace the purpose of Web 2.0
as a means of innovation, open communication, collaboration and user-generated content. If they
can achieve this, it may contribute to friendly working culture as well as to be more open to face any
changes (Sivarajah, Irani & Weerakkody, 2015).
Adding to that, in some government organizations, in order to be in line with the implementation of
Web 2.0, existing staff will be required to undergo education and training using Web 2.0 technologies
hence, it is time-consuming since it is a new experience for them and require lot of learning. Yun-Jo,
et al. (2009) state that it consumes much of the time to learn and manage new technologies. Hence,
time is considered as a barrier for Web 2.0 usages as it takes time away from learning subject matter
content particularly in teaching. Organizations also often face challenges in term of technical issues,
whereby Bennett et al. (2012) highlight many of the tools were new and still under development,
and also because the institutions involved had not yet developed systems to support Web 2.0 tools.
This can also lead to staff not willing to engage with the new IT tool due to resistance in learning
the new tools (Ward et al., 2009).
The open nature of Web 2.0 is another main issue and it brings out significant challenges over
the information shared. It is considered as a security threat in any organizations where privacy and
confidentiality are prone to be exposed or leaked. In educational learning, this feature of Web 2.0
cause uneasiness to many students and this has led to their reluctance to participate in class activities
that utilize Web 2.0 technologies. Moreover, research did by Ward et al. (2009) has found that students
tend to inherent risks of reducing the education structure since it is hard to balance between the powers
of academics and students. For example, the public nature of wiki collaboration has made students
uncomfortable and uneasy at times thus, they prefer face-to face interaction between teachers and
students. Therefore, concerns over reliability, accuracy and authority arise from this threat. The search
engines, such as Google also make students to have uncoordinated and often irrelevant and brings to
an information overload (Pieri & Diamantini, 2014). This also can cause issues such as authorship
6

International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management

Volume 7 Issue 4 October-December 2016

whereby Web 2.0 may cause claimed of work by anyone in intellectual contributions (Selwen, 2008).
This indicates that the more information is shown, the more information must be managed.
Danciu and Grosseck (2011) also find several challenges in the use of Web 2.0 in education
sectors. For instance, students have difficulty in locating and understanding key studies in social media
knowledge. Therefore an implementer has to think about the level of attractiveness and activation
offered, and, most importantly, which technologies, services, applications or Web 2.0 tools will be
employed.
3. METHODOLOGY
The descriptive research method was chosen for this research as it can provide information about
the behavior, attitudes or other characteristics of a particular group (Jackson, 2009). In descriptive
studies, there are two general methods of conducting research which is qualitative or quantitative.
For this research, the quantitative approach was selected in order to get precise data on use of the
Web 2.0-based knowledge sharing platform in tertiary education. Questionnaires are employed as the
research instrument which aims at gathering primary source data from numbers of samples selected
for the study. Data gathered from the survey were analyzed descriptively using Microsoft Excel.
3.1. Literature Survey
A literature survey is a method by which it provides guides or helps the researcher to define or identify
a problem (Researchgate, 2015). The literature survey uses secondary data from books, journals and
online journals in order to conduct a literature review.
3.1.1. Population, Sampling, and Sample Design
A sampling method is a method of choosing a group of peoples from the entire target population in
order to obtain the required information. For this research, a non-probability sampling method was
invoked as it is suitable for a widely dispersed population such as tertiary level students. The target
population for this research is limited to tertiary level students and lecturers. For the sample design,
a questionnaire was designed and distributed by using an online survey through www.google.com/
forms.By using the online survey method, data can be collected easily and on time.
3.1.2. Sample Size
A sample size will determine the clarity and consistency of research hence a larger sample size will
be more representative of a population. As this research is a preliminary research, a sample size of
100 tertiary students, education officers and lecturers was used. The main aim for conducting the
survey is to examine the sharing and knowledge aspects of using Web 2.0 between students and
lecturers in tertiary education.
4. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
4.1. Respondents Demographic Information
There were 100 questionnaires were distributed, but only 60 proper responses were received (60%
response rate). Five (5) types of demographic information have been gathered from respondents.
Results of demographic information collected in this research are shown in Table 1.
Most of the respondents are female (77%) while the remaining 23% of the respondents were
male. 85% of the respondents are in the range of age between 21-29, 10% are between 15- 20 years
old, 5% are between 30 39 years old and none of the respondents are 40 years old above.
In term of education, qualifications of the respondents are 64% bachelor degree holder, 28% are
master degree holder, 8% are higher national diploma (HND) and diploma holder and none of the
7

International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management

Volume 7 Issue 4 October-December 2016

Table 1. Summary of demographic information (n=60)

No
1

Demographic

Frequency

Percentage (%)

Gender
Female

46

23

Male

14

77

PhD

Master Degree

17

28

Degree

38

64

HND, Diploma

Student

54

92

Lecturer

Officer

Technical School

Vocational School

ITB

UBD

49

82

UNISSA

Polytechnic

IGS

Laksamana College

Cosmopolitian College

Other

15 - 20

21 - 29

51

85

30 - 39

10

40 above

Highest Qualification

Current Position

College/ University/ Institution

Age Group

respondents is a PhD holder. We managed to get 92% respondents from students, 3% from lecturer and
5% from officers that are working in tertiary education. Most of the respondents were from Universiti
Brunei Darussalam (UBD), and the rest were from other universities/higher education institution in
Brunei Darussalam. Table 1 summarized the demography data of the respondents.
4.2. Knowledge Sharing Using Web 2.0
Based on our analysis, most respondents agree that lecturers use Web 2.0 to update and review the
data and facilitate communication with students. This also shows that the respondents agree that the
current Web 2.0 system supports information and knowledge sharing. However, 50% of the respondents
are neither feeling satisfied or unsatisfied with the current quality use of Web 2.0 provided by their
8

International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management

Volume 7 Issue 4 October-December 2016

institutions. This finding was supported by Birkinshaw (2001), Forsgren et al. (2000), and Meso
and Smith (2000) whereby the need for leveraging knowledge management in an organization is an
important mechanism to facilitate and support interaction among individuals in organizations.
There were more than 10% of the respondents strongly agree and more than 20% of them agree
on the use of Web 2.0 in contributing to distribution of information across faculties (see Figure 2).
This results support Huang and Liaw (2004), whereby in the process of knowledge sharing, knowledge
is internalized when knowledge is created and shared through an online learning community and
delivers by an individual.The concept of combination is also used to enable knowledge to be spread
to all individual, whether it is from students to students, students to lecturers, or vice versa using
communication networks.
More than 40% respondents agree with sharing skills and information with fellow students
colleague and lecturers in the same faculty and other faculties while less than 10% disagree with
this point, however majority of the respondents involved (more than 50%) in this survey felt neutral
about this point. This result does not agree with studies did by Pusurinkum (2006), Sirirat (2008),
and Auttawutikul (2008) as their studies emphasized on knowledge sharing such as information, skill,
experience and intellect that relate and is suitable for knowledge sharing. Their study also mentioned
people used many types of technologies for knowledge sharing support which must be well-selected
for suitable activity of knowledge sharing, and respondents felt neutral when using various Web 2.0
systems provided by their institutes.
4.3. Web 2.0 Knowledge Sharing Platform Preferences
Two questions regarding knowledge sharing platform were asked to the respondents in order to find
out which sharing activities and online application were mostly preferred by them. These are shown
and summarize in Figure 3 and Figure 4.
Figure 3 shows the fifteen preferred knowledge sharing activities ranked by the respondents
using a Likert scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Based on the graphs shown above,
most respondents preferred to use Web 2.0 as a place to document knowledge and practices as well
as to forward useful information.
Figure 2. Knowledge sharing using Web 2.0

International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management

Volume 7 Issue 4 October-December 2016

Figure 3. Preferred knowledge sharing activities

Figure 4. Preferred online applications

10

International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management

Volume 7 Issue 4 October-December 2016

Most people would prefer to use Web 2.0 as a platform to document knowledge and forward useful
information due to the benefits that the Web 2.0 possessed (Paroutis & Saleh, 2009). For example,
knowledge sharing platform such as GoogleDoc, Facebook, YouTube allows users to keep, save share
create, describe, post, search, collaborate, share and communicate online content in various formats
such as video, audio, pictures and etc. hence enhancing the effectiveness of communication among
users. Whereby, users are able to find and get knowledge at a faster speed as well as stayed inform
about the latest news and activities occurring around their universities. According to Paroutis and
Saleh (2009), Web 2.0 also allows the generation of discussion, problem solutions and feedbacks
from among users.
In short, most respondents prefer most of the knowledge sharing activities using Web 2.0 due to
the effectiveness of the Web 2.0 as a knowledge sharing platform. This is in line Macaskill& Owen
(2006) that say the web allows users to gain access, contribute, tag, annotate and bookmark web
mediated content in various formats such as text, video, audio, pictures and graphs. Web 2.0 also
differs from Web 1.0 in such a way that even those who have minimal web skills can contribute and
use the Web 2.0 to share and create knowledge.
Figure 4 summarizes the results of the response against the questions about the preferred online
applications according to a Likert scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The questions
directly and indirectly inter-relate to Web 2.0 technologies specifically Web board, cross platform
messaging application such as WhatsApp, Telegram and etc., Social Networking Sites such as
Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, Video conference such as Skype, E-mail (including Gmail, Hotmail
and etc) and Web 2.0 knowledge sharing platform provided by respective institutions such as Learning
Management System, Canvas, and Edmodo.
Based on Figure 4 shown above, email was mostly preferred by the respondents for online
communication in terms of knowledge sharing due to users familiarity and ease of use (Farmer, 2009).
Apart from that, according toWedgeworth(2008), using email to share knowledge and information is
also very convenient as files can be stored and does not expire. Furthermore, most web based email
accounts have antivirus software that will scan attachments for viruses before sending and downloading
hence makes a strong reasoning as why most respondents would prefer to use email. Beside email,
most respondents prefer Web 2.0 knowledge sharing platforms that are provided by their respective
universities or institutions. The main reason behind this is that the Web 2.0 knowledge sharing
platforms are the formal system that was required by the universities. For example, Universiti Brunei
Darussalam (UBD) requires their lecturers and students to fully utilize the UBD Canvas which is a
Web 2.0 learning management system where students and lecturers can submit and share slides and
notes, gives grades, and have discussion among each other. The finding does not support a study done
by Eyyam (2011), Grosseck (2009), Goktalay and Ozdilek (2010) whereby their findings found out
that instant messaging software, social networks and audio and video conferencing are much more
preferred rather than emails and knowledge sharing platforms provided by the institutes.
4.4. Benefits of Knowledge Sharing Using Web 2.0
Respondents were asked with two questions about the benefits of knowledge sharing using Web 2.0
and the barriers of knowledge sharing using web 2.0 based on individual, technology and knowledge
sharing capabilities. The result findings are shown in Figure 5.
Figure 5 shows the results on the benefits of knowledge sharing using Web 2.0 which was measured
according to Likert Scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Based on the findings, most
respondents (more than 80%) agreed that the most important benefit of knowledge sharing using
Web 2.0 is due to the fact that it increases flexibility and ease of use. This finding is supported with
findings by Paroutis and Saleh (2009), Yun-Jo, et al. (2009), Aworuwa et al. (2009), Tyagi (2012),
Ward et al. (2009), and Kulaki and Mahony (2014) that found Web 2.0 provides a more flexible
learning in terms of interaction, communication and collaboration as a whole. Moreover, the features

11

International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management

Volume 7 Issue 4 October-December 2016

Figure 5. Benefits of knowledge sharing using Web 2.0

of web 2.0 tools offer convenience in such a way that people with minimal web skills can also adapt
these tools to knowledge sharing.
4.5. Barriers of Knowledge Sharing Using Web 2.0
Figure 6 illustrates the results on the barriers of knowledge sharing using web 2.0 based on individual
views using a Likert scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). As can be seen from the
results, majority of the respondents agreed that the major barrier is the fear of accidentally sharing

Figure 6. Barriers of knowledge using Web 2.0 - individual

12

International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management

Volume 7 Issue 4 October-December 2016

confidential information. According to Paroutis and Saleh (2009), the fear of publishing or sharing
confidential information is one of the factors that could hinder the use of Web 2.0 tools in organisations
and thus, this shows that it is significant to our result findings. Moreover, as supported by Yun-Jo, et
al. (2009), most students are very uncomfortable with openness and are reluctant to share confidential
information via Web 2.0 tools. However, most of the respondents (about 50%) are neither agree nor
disagree with most of the barriers listed on the diagram above.
Figure 7 shows the results on the barriers of knowledge sharing using Web 2.0 in terms of
technology and it was measured using a Likert scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
From the findings, it shows that two important barriers on utilizing Web 2.0 tools are the problem of
inadequate hardware and software facilities as well as due to outdated and unreliable information on
website. Based on a study by Aworuwa, et al. (2009), some web 2.0 tools might be having technical
glitches or might not work well with current course management systems and thus it prevents students
from accessing the web.
According to Bergendahl and Jensen (2011)and Selwen (2008), knowledge sharing using web
2.0 might also expose to unreliability of information for example, Wiki whereby it is difficult to
distinguish between fact and fiction because there is a high risk that collaborators could deface a
page and lead to a high potential of vandalism. These cause barriers to using Web 2.0 in sharing
knowledge. Also from the result findings, majority of the respondents are neither agree nor disagree
on the lack of knowledge on new technology as one of the barriers.
Figure 8 shows the results on the barriers of knowledge sharing using Web 2.0 in terms of
knowledge sharing according to Likert scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The
majority of respondents agreed that the barrier in knowledge sharing is the tendency to share irrelevant
information when using online forum for example, a discussion board. According to Bunchum, et
al. (2015), tendency to share irrelevant information in knowledge sharing may cause wasted time
and unaccomplished goals. An online forum is open to everyone who has access to it, thus it serves
to ensure that all information is accurate however, if irrelevant information is being shared it will
affect its relevance and credibility. (Metzger, Flanagin, 2011). Nonetheless, more than 20% of the
respondents are neither agree nor disagree and more than 10% disagree on the lack of confidence in
the usefulness of knowledge sharing among people.

Figure 7. Barriers of knowledge sharing using web 2.0 technology

13

International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management

Volume 7 Issue 4 October-December 2016

Figure 8. Barriers of knowledge sharing using Web 2.0 knowledge sharing

5. CONCLUSION
The role of Web 2.0 in facilitation information and knowledge sharing in tertiary institutions is
becoming important. Even though the result shows that respondents are neither feeling satisfied nor
unsatisfied to the current Web 2.0 offers for information and knowledge sharing, most respondents
agree that Web 2.0 is crucial in order to facilitate learning.
In terms of preferences, the results show that respondents are more preferred to use Web 2.0 as a
platform to document their knowledge and practices. In addition, results also shows that respondents
preferred to use Web 2.0 to forward useful information of their peers. Respondents also much prefer
to use email and Web 2.0 information and knowledge sharing platforms provided by their institutions
to aid their studies especially in sharing and creating knowledge.
It can be derived from the findings that the main benefit of knowledge sharing using Web 2.0
is the flexibility and ease of use of they provide and thus, it offers convenience to people using
them. However, there are some notable barriers to knowledge sharing using Web 2.0 based on the
results, which are mainly the fear inadvertently shared confidential information over Web 2.0. On
the technological side, barriers to knowledge sharing using Web 2.0 are the problem of inadequate
hardware and software facilities as well as due to outdated and unreliable information on websites.
Finally, barrier of using Web 2.0 in information and knowledge sharing includes the tendency to share
irrelevant information when using online forum, which creates some concerns.
6. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY AND FURTHER RESEARCH
The research is basically an exploratory research. There are some limitations that should be taken
into consideration which are as follows:
1. The limitations are related to the small sample size (60 out of 100 respondents) with majority of
the respondents are students from Universiti Brunei Darussalam which is too small and limited
to represent the population of students, education officers and lecturers of tertiary education in
Brunei Darussalam;

14

International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management

Volume 7 Issue 4 October-December 2016

2. Due to the majority of the respondents were students, the results of this study might be imbalance
hence lead to bias;
3. Due to time constraint, only small numbers of respondents were able to be attracted to participate.
As such, a follow up research which a much larger number of respondents need to be conducted.
In addition, research on information and knowledge sharing using Web 2.0 has progressed day by
day and logically the area will be developed more in the near future. Due to this, the research shows
potential in research opportunity, not just in the area of education or specifically tertiary education,
but also other sectors such as organizations, public and private sector which can contribute to the
subject of knowledge sharing using Web 2.0. Further studies might be useful, for example, finding
trends in the use of Web 2.0 as a knowledge sharing platform over recent decades.

15

International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management

Volume 7 Issue 4 October-December 2016

REFERENCES
Afzaal, H. S. (2012). A preliminary study of school adiministrators use of information and communication
technologies: Bruneian perspective. International Journal of Education and Development using Information
and Communication Technology, 8(1), 29-45.
Ardichvili, A., Page, V., & Wentling, T. (2003). Motivation and barriers to participation in virtual knowledge-sharing
communities of practice. Journal of Knowledge Management, 7(1), 6477. doi:10.1108/13673270310463626
Aworuwa, B., Ballard, G., Williams, K., & Yun-Jo, A. (2009). Teaching with Web 2.0 technologies: Benefits,
barriers and best practices. Retrieved fromhttp://www.aect.org/pdf/proceedings09/2009/09_1.pdf
Balcikanli, C. (2009). Long live YouTube: L2 stories about YouTube in language learning. Proceedings of the
International Online Language Conference (IOLC) (pp. 91-96).
Balubaid, A. (2012). Using Web 2.0 technology to enhance knowledge sharing in an academic department.
Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com
Bennet, S., Bishop, A., Dalgarno, B., Waycott, J., & Kennedy, G. (2012). Implementing Web 2.0 Technologies
in Higher Education: A collective case study. Computers & Education, 59(2), 524534. doi:10.1016/j.
compedu.2011.12.022
Bhatt, D. G. (2000). Organizing knowledge in the knowledge development cycle. Journal of Knowledge
Management, 4(1), 1526. doi:10.1108/13673270010315371
Birkinshaw, J. (2001). Making sense of knowledge management. Ivey Business Journal, 65(4), 3236.
Bughin, J., Chui, M., & Miller, A. (2009). McKinsey global survey results: How companies are benefiting from
Web 2.0. Retrieved from http://www.mckinsey.com/
Bunchum, A., Taguatung, O., Sukonthasab, S., & Boonchutima, S. (2015). Survey results of knowledge sharing
preferences and practices in public health communication professionals in Thailands Department of Disease
Control: A descriptive Study. Journal of Health Research, 29(5), 395401. doi:10.14456/jhr.2015.30
Choi, B., & Lee, H. (2002). Knowledge Management strategy and its link to knowledge creation process. Expert
Systems with Applications, 23(3), 173187. doi:10.1016/S0957-4174(02)00038-6
Danciu, E., & Grosseck, G. (2011). Social aspects of Web 2.0 technologies: Traching or trachers challenges?
Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 37683773. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.371
Farmer, A. D., Bruckner Holt, C. E. M., Cook, M. J., & Hearing, S. D. (2009). Social networking sites: A novel
portal for communication. Postgraduate Medical Journal, 85(1007), 455459. doi:10.1136/pgmj.2008.074674
PMID:19734511
Forsgren, M., Johanson, J., & Sharma, D. D. (2000). Development of MNC centers of excellence. In U. Holm &
T. Pedersen (Eds.), The emergence and impact of MNC centres of excellence (pp. 4567). London: MacMillan.
Goktalay, S., & Ozdilek, Z. (2010). Pre-services teachers perceptions about Web 2.0 technology. Procedia:
Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 47374741. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.760
Grosseck, G. (2009). To use or not to use web 2.0 in higher education? Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences,
1(1), 478482. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.087
Hargadon, S. (2008). Web 2.0 is the future of education. Retrieved from http://www.stevehargadon.com/2008/03/
web-20-is-future-ofeducation.html
Huang, H. M., & Liaw, S. S. (2004). The framework of knowledge creation for online learning environments.
Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue canadienne de lapprentissage et de la technologie, 30(1).
Joia, L. A. (2000). Using intellectual capital to evaluate educational technology projects. Journal of Intellectual
Capital, 1(4), 341356. doi:10.1108/14691930010359243
Kosik, A. (2007). The implications of Facebook, sharing the Commonwealth: Critical issues in higher education.
Retrieved from http://www.pcpa.net/March2006.pdf. 2007

16

International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management

Volume 7 Issue 4 October-December 2016

Kulakli, A., & Mahony, S. (2014). Knowledge creation and sharing with Web 2.0 tools for teaching and learning
roles in so-called University 2.0. Retrieved fromhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/
Macaskill, W., & Owen, D. (2006). Web 2.0 to go.Proceedings of LIANZA Conference 06, Wellington.
Malhotra, Y. (2000). Knowledge management and new organization forms: A framework for business model
innovation. Information Resources Management Journal, 13(1), 510. doi:10.4018/irmj.2000010101
Meso, P., & Smith, R. (2000). A resource-based view of organizational knowledge management systems. Journal
of Knowledge Management, 4(3), 224234. doi:10.1108/13673270010350020
Metzger, M. J., & Andrew, J. A. (2011). Using Web 2.0 technologies to enhance evidence-based medical
information. Journal of Health Communication. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download
?doi=10.1.1.403.5398&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Oxford Business Group. (2011). The report Brunei Darussalam 2011. Brunei Darussalam: Prime Minister Office.
Parket, A., Cros, R., Prusak, L., & Borgatti, S. P. (2001). Knowing what we know: Supporting knowledge creation
and sharing in social networks. Organizational Dynamics, 30(2), 100120.
Pieri, M., & Diamantini, D. (2014). An E-Learning Web 2.0 Experiences. Procedia: Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 116, 12171221. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.371
Pusurinkum, S. (2006). Development of an information and communication technology knowledge sharing
model using a collaborative learning approarch for developing communities of practice of lab school teachers
in bangkok metropolis [Unpublished thesis]. Chulalongkorn University, Thailand.
Selwyn, N. (2008). Education 2.0? Designing the Web for teaching and learning (Commentary). London
Knowledge Lab, University of London. Retrieved from http://www.tlrp.org/tel/publications/files/2008/11/
tel_comm_final.pdf
Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: the art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doupleday.
Shannon, C. E., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: University of
Illinois Press.
Sirirat, N. (2008). The development of a knowledge sharing via network model based on the self-directed learning
approach to create team learning of educational personnel [Unpublished thesis]. Chulalongkorn University,
Thailand.
Sivarajah, U., Irani, Z., & Weerakkody, V. (2015). Evaluating the use and impact of Web 2.0 technologies in
local government. Government Information Quarterly, 32(4), 473487. doi:10.1016/j.giq.2015.06.004
Storey, C., & Kelly, D. (2002). Innovation in services: The need for knowledge management. Australasian
Marketing Journal, 10(1), 5970. doi:10.1016/S1441-3582(02)70144-4
Tyagi, S. (2012). Adoption of Web 2.0 technology in higher education:A case trudy of universities in
National Captial Region, India. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and
Communication Technology (IJEDICT), 8(2), 28-43.
Ward, R., Moule, P., & Lockyer, L. (2009). Adoption of Web 2.0 technologies in education for health professionals
in the UK: Where are we and why?. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 7(2), 165172.
Wedgeworth, F. (2008). Knowledge sharing: using searchable email databases [Dissertation]. Retrieved from
http://arrow.dit.ie/scschcomdis/7

Nurul Afiqah Hj Nor Amin received her MM in Corporate Management from the University of Brunei Darussalam in
2015. In 2014, she received a second upper class degree and was awarded the prestigious Deans list in 2011. She
is also a part time tutor at a local institution since 2011. She is active in conducting research activities in strategic
management, leadership and human resource management. She is involved in a variety of volunteering activities
and she is the country coordinator of a non-government organization, Earth Hour Brunei.
17

International Journal of Asian Business and Information Management

Volume 7 Issue 4 October-December 2016

Amy Suliza binti Hasnan has completed both her undergraduate and post graduate studies at the University
of Brunei Darussalam. She earned a Bachelor of Arts in Environmental studies which was awarded in 2014. In
2015,she received her Master of Management in public sector. Her areas of interest include human resource
management, strategic management as well as environmental management. She enjoys going to educational
field trips and participate in volunteering activities.
Nurul Nazirah Binti Besar received her first degree in environmental studies from University of Brunei Darussalam
in 2014 and obtained a Master Degree in Maste or Management (Public Management) in the same university in
2015. In 2013 she was awarded the prestigous Deans list. Her research interest include Strategic Management,
Human Resource Management, E-government and Forestry & Environmental Management. She is currently
working as a teacher in a local private school. She is also actively involved in cultural activities and volunteering
works especially in assisting less fortunate students in their studies.
Mohammad Nabil Almunawar is currently a senior lecturer at School of Business and Economics, Universiti of
Brunei Darussalam (UBD), Brunei Darussalam. He received his bachelor degree in 1983 from Bogor Agricultural
University, Indonesia, master Degree (MSc Computer Science) from the Department of Computer Science,
University of Western Ontario, London, Canada in 1991 and Ph.D. from the University of New South Wales
(School of Computer Science and Engineering, UNSW) in 1998. Dr Almunawar has published more than 60
papers in refereed journals, book chapters and international conferences. He has more than 25 years teaching
experiences in the area computer and information systems. His overall research interests include applications of
IT in Management, Electronic Business/Commerce, Health Informatics, information security and cloud computing.
He is also interested in object-oriented technology, databases and multimedia retrieval.

18