Knowledge Management Learning From Failure-Storey-2000

See
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235262932
Knowledge Management Initiatives: Learning

from Failure
Article in Journal of Knowledge Management · June 2000

DOI: 10.1108/13673270010372279
CITATIONS READS
306 1,650
2 authors, including:
John Storey
The Open University (UK)
174 PUBLICATIONS 5,346 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
NIHR Clinical Leadership View project
Management development: a comparative study View project
All content following this page was uploaded by John Storey on 26 May 2016.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Knowledge Management
Knowledge management initiatives: learning from failure
John StoreyElizabeth Barnett
Article information:
To cite this document:
John StoreyElizabeth Barnett, (2000),"Knowledge management initiatives: learning from failure", Journal of Knowledge
Management, Vol. 4 Iss 2 pp. 145 - 156
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13673270010372279
Downloaded on: 26 May 2016, At: 01:48 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 52 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 8089 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2001),"Knowledge management in organizations: examining the interaction between technologies, techniques, and people",
Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 5 Iss 1 pp. 68-75 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13673270110384419
(1997),"Knowledge Management: An Introduction and Perspective", Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 1 Iss 1 pp.
Downloaded by OPEN UNIVERSITY At 01:48 26 May 2016 (PT)
6-14 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13673279710800682
(2005),"Critical success factors for implementing knowledge management in small and medium enterprises", Industrial
Management & Data Systems, Vol. 105 Iss 3 pp. 261-279 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02635570510590101
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:108095 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please
visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Introduction
Knowledge
The scene is played out on a daily basis.
management Conference centres and hotels throughout the
initiatives: learning world entertain management gatherings with
the usual paraphernalia of designer mineral
from failure water and glacier mints in imitation cut-glass
containers. Our case-study begins in just such
John Storey and a setting one day in May 1998. The senior
Elizabeth Barnett team of `Ìnternational Resources'', a large,
European-headquartered company, are
gathered to participate in a strategy debate
which includes the commencement of the
firm's knowledge management initiative.
There is a high-level executive sponsor,
syndicate groups are mobilised to analyse the
The authors meaning of the concept, its implications for
John Storey is Professor of Human Resource the company and the type of action plans
Management at The Open University Business School, required. The project gets off to a promising
Milton Keynes, UK. start and a project team is set-up to drive the
Elizabeth Barnett is a Research Fellow at The Open initiative forward. But, 12 months later,
University Business School, Milton Keynes, UK. despite a great deal of effort and commitment,
it becomes clear that the initiative has failed.
Keywords In this article we seek to examine in some
detail this example of a failed knowledge
Knowledge management, Learning, Business failures
management initiative, to analyse what went
wrong and to identify the key learning points.
Abstract
Large numbers of organizations are taking
Large numbers of organizations are taking great interest great interest in the idea of knowledge
in the idea of knowledge management and many are management and many are launching
launching knowledge management initiatives and knowledge management initiatives and
programmes. A large proportion of such initiatives will programmes. A significant proportion of such
fail. Yet, despite the injunctions to ``learn from failure'', initiatives will fail. Charles Lucier, the first
little detailed attention has been paid to why and how chief knowledge officer of Booz-Allen &
these apparently popular initiatives run into difficulties. Hamilton suggests that 84 per cent of all KM
The purpose of this article is to examine, in some unusual programmes will fail to have any real impact.
detail, a significant example of a failed knowledge Moreover, he notes that `à disturbingly high
management initiative in order to analyse what went proportion of programs initiated with great
wrong and to identify the key learning points. fanfare are cut back within two or three years''
(Lucier and Torsiliera, 1997, p. 15). But so
Electronic access far, insufficient attention has been paid to
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is why these initiatives fail and the learning
available at points have not been adequately explored.
http://www.emerald-library.com This article is organized in three sections:
the first reviews the key elements of
knowledge management initiatives and
summarises the literature which, to date, has
speculated on the sources of failure for
initiatives of this kind; the second section
describes and analyses the failed attempt at a
KM initiative in a significant European-based
The research reported in this article derives from

Journal of Knowledge Management an ESRC-funded project: Award Number
Volume 4 . Number 2 . 2000 . pp. 145±156 L125251053. This project was part of the ESRC's
# MCB University Press . ISSN 1367-3270 Programme on the management of innovation.
145
Knowledge management initiatives: learning from failure Journal of Knowledge Management
John Storey and Elizabeth Barnett Volume 4 . Number 2 . 2000 . 145±156
company; the third section revisits the main contribution of firms, as institutions, is the
themes in the literature in the light of the creation and integration of knowledge (Grant,
analysis of the case study. 1996; Tsoukas, 1996). The ``greatest
challenge for the manager of intellectual
capital is to create an organization that can
share the knowledge. When skills belong to
Knowledge management and
the company as a whole, they create
knowledge management initiatives
competitive advantages that others cannot
Mainstream writing on knowledge match'' (Stewart, 1997).
management is overwhelmingly optimistic. There are wider explanations for the
The claims made on its behalf make the amount of attention being paid to knowledge
underlying proposition about the value of management. For example, growing interest
knowledge management almost irresistibly in the resource-based view of the firm means
attractive. For example, ``KM is becoming a strategy academics and others are paying
core competence that companies must more attention to problems of internal, cross-
develop in order to succeed in tomorrow's boundary knowledge sharing. Issues of
dynamic global economy'' (Skyrme and horizontal as well as vertical co-ordination
Amidon, 1998). Another proponent observes and organizational integration are therefore
``Here's an uncontroversial thought if ever increasingly coming to the fore (Argyres,
you've heard one: a firm's competitive 1996). It has been argued that high-
advantage depends more than anything on its technology industries in particular have
knowledge. Or to be slightly more specific, on created new technologies with new
what it knows, how it uses what it knows and technological inter-dependencies between
how fast it can know something new'' business units (Doz et al., 1987). From the
(Prusack, 1997, p. ix). While Nonaka (1994, new strategy perspective, one can ``conceive
p. 14) contends ``The ever increasing of the firm as a portfolio of core competencies
importance of knowledge in contemporary and disciplines'', this view then suggests that
society calls for a shift in our thinking''. And `ìnterfirm competition as opposed to inter-
Thomas Stewart argues ``Knowledge has product competition, is essentially concerned
become the most important factor in with the acquisition of skills. In this view,
economic life. It is the chief ingredient of global competitiveness is largely a function of
what we buy and sell, the raw material with the firm's pace, efficiency and extent of
which we work. Intellectual capital ± not knowledge accumulation'' (Hamel, 1991,
natural resources, machinery or even financial p. 83).
capital ± has become the one indispensable Beyond the hype there is the serious
asset of corporations.'' And, at national level, business of finding useful ways in which to act
government promotes the idea of the on these insights. Knowledge may be
``knowledge economy'' (DTI, 1998). important but in what sense can it really be
The argument underlying these claims is ``managed''? There are two key issues here,
that knowledge now represents the key first, what kind of interventions are managers
competitive sustained resource (Quinn, 1992; being invited to make in order to effect and
Reich, 1992; Drucker, 1993) ``There is little implement a knowledge perspective on
doubt that we have entered the knowledge business strategy and second, what kind of
economy where what organizations know is difficulties might be anticipated in this
becoming more important than the traditional endeavour? Concerning the first, ``knowledge
sources of economic power'' (KPMG, 1998). management'' has come to be used to cover
Most of the literature to date has focused on initiatives ranging from `òrganizational
the nature of knowledge, types of knowledge learning'' attempts to ``database management
and the theoretical bases of knowledge tools'' (Ruggles, 1998, p. 80). A great deal of
management. For example, one key strand the literature on knowledge management is in
associates KM with organizational learning fact concerned with its meaning and scope ±
(Polanyi, 1962, 1966; Spender, 1996a, (see, for example, Edvinsson and Sullivan,
1996b; Cheng and Van de Ven, 1996). A 1996; Stewart, 1997) and there is little need
second, associates it with the resource-based to rehearse these points here.
view of strategic management (Penrose, 1959; But it is the second issue, that is, the
Nelson and Winter, 1982). Within this question of the problems and the barriers that
strand, it is argued that the primary we wish to focus our attention on in this
146
article. Despite the generally optimistic nature reading of the literature concords with this
of most KM literature there are a few assessment.
examples to be found of attempts to probe The different meanings of, approaches to,
this second issue. For example, an Ernst & and possibilities for KM lead, therefore, to
Young survey of 431 US and European potential micro-political battles over the
organizations conducted in 1997 found that ownership of KM initiatives. There is plenty
the biggest reported difficulties were of scope for turf wars given the problems of
``changing people's behaviour'', and the getting to grips with such an elusive
existence of an inappropriate `òrganizational phenomenon as ``knowledge''. As Frank
culture'' (Ruggles, 1998). Likewise, in his Blackler has observed, it is messy and hard to
classic Fortune magazine article, manage. How different specialists attempt to
``Brainpower'', Thomas Stewart (1991) manage it to a large extent reflects how people
argued that getting results from investing in understand and define it. ``Knowledge is
knowledge requires `à corporate culture that multifaceted and complex, being both
allows it to flow freely, which means breaking situated and abstract, implicit and explicit,
down hierarchies and getting rid of rules that distributed and individual, physical and
stifle new ideas''. mental, developing and static, verbal and
Another common complaint is that the encoded'' (Blackler, 1995). These
practice of knowledge management tends to characteristics make not only the actual
be too IT/IS focused and too often IT/IS-led management of knowledge difficult but even
(Scarbrough and Swan, 1999; Scarbrough et achieving consensus around the meaning of
al., 1999; Swan, 1999). It has even been the intent is inherently problematical. This is
suggested that KM in this regard could be certainly an issue which we will surface in the
seen as less developed than the literature on case which follows. Moreover, intranets can
the learning organization. As attention on the themselves actually `èxacerbate turf wars''
former has increased, the attention to the (Cohen, 1998) and IT/IS ``solutions'' can in
latter has decreased. ``Far from being a fact strengthen the barriers which already
development of the learning organization with exist as well as creating firewalls by reducing
its emphasis on people management, KM is a informal contact.
divergence with its own unique discourse and So, broadly, two main points can be seen to
focus, specifically emphasising IT and tools arise in the literature to date: one, that KM
driven approaches'' (Swan, 1999, p. 4). Such initiatives so far have been IS/IT dominated
concerns are amplified when it is recalled that and that they therefore neglect the
the contention has been made that there is in complexities of organizational processes ±
fact no direct link between investment in IT and, further, that this is sub-optimal for the
and subsequent business performance organization; second, that the detailed
(Mulhotra, 1998). processes which relate to people are also
The main allegation however is simply that, largely undescribed. The problem associated
``while the implications [of KM] for with the IT-driven approaches are several.
information systems development and Critically, they tend to be supply driven ± i.e.
practice have received close attention, the focused on making existing knowledge more
implications for personnel management widely available. This assumes that people
development and practice have not'' will be willing to share their knowledge and
(Scarbrough et al., 1999, p. 25). The neglect also assumes that people will use the
of people management issues has also been information which is made available on
noted by Ruggles. It has also been pointed out intranets and the like. The emphasis so far has
that ``By far the majority of articles have tended to be on knowledge as a commodity;
appeared in the IS/IT literatures with, for making experts' knowledge more explicit and
example, nearly 70 per cent of articles in 1998 accessible via computer applications. Herein
appearing in these literatures'' (Ruggles, is seen the seeds of a further problem ± such
1998, p. 21). So far, knowledge management knowledge tends to be `èxplicit knowledge''
has been mainly sponsored by IS/IT whereas the often more valuable ``tacit
specialists. It has been argued that few cases knowledge'' (Grant, 1996) is neglected. Tacit
`àctually describe, in anything other than the knowledge is much more personal and is
broadest terms, the people management and likely to be context-specific. This latter form
organizational processes involved in KM of knowledge is hard to make available
initiatives'' (Swan, 1999, p. 5). Our own through computer systems. Further learning
147
occurs while applying and acting upon expertise share it with others. Technology
knowledge ± as argued by Schon (1983) with alone won't get an employee who is
regard to the idea of the ``reflective uninterested in seeking knowledge to hop
practitioner''. The realisation of the tacit onto a keyboard and start searching or
knowledge potential ``requires the close browsing. The mere presence of technology
involvement and co-operation of the knowing won't create a learning organization, a
subject'' (Lam, 1998). meritocracy or a knowledge-creating
Attempts to codify tacit knowledge may company''(Davenport and Prusack, 1998).
only produce knowledge which is: useless (too Even if these technological problems are
difficult to explain); trivial; redundant (if surmounted, there will remain other
subject to change); irrelevant to a wider managerial issues ± not least of which is the
audience; politically naõÈve; or inaccurate question of the management of ``knowledge
(Swan, 1999, p. 7). Some commentators have workers''. Henry Mintzberg has suggested
therefore stressed the inherent limits of that they respond to inspiration not
intranets which merely capture the trivial and supervision. He draws lessons from the way a
the codifiable. symphony orchestra operates. ``Leadership at
To these complaints and reservations about the individual level'' he notes, is ``highly
the supply-driven IT/IS approach can be circumscribed. Empowerment is a silly notion
added the point that, in any case, most here. Musicians hardly need to be empowered
managers already suffer from information by conductors. Inspired maybe ± infused with
overload. In such circumstances, KM systems feeling and energy ± but not empowered''
which concentrate on the capture, (Mintzberg, 1998, p.145). One of the ways in
codification and archiving of knowledge need which such enthusing might be encouraged is
to take greater note of the issue concerning through the encouragement of ``learning
the demand for knowledge and the associated communities'' and ``communities of
question of knowledge use. commitment'' (Koffman and Senge, 1993)
This neglect of the users' perspective may but there are many aspects of organizational
not be accidental. Part of the rationale of KM life which militate sharply against such ideals.
is to reduce organizational vulnerability by These points too need to be borne in mind if
transferring knowledge from individuals. The the knowledge management roll-out is not to
intent is to ensure that the intellectual lead to failure.
property becomes owned by the organization. Moreover, it has been noted that ``getting
But this in turn may be what leads to a employees to share what they know is no
simplistic view of ``knowledge capture''. An longer a technology challenge ± it's a
entirely alternative approach would be to deal corporate culture challenge'' (Hibbard and
with the problem of potential knowledge loss Carillo, 1998, p. 49). ``Knowledge
by seeking to retain staff and by taking steps management is a business practice more than
to win their commitment. In any case, the a technology'' reports the research director of
supply-driven and demand-driven approaches Delphi Consulting Group in Boston. `Ìn our
are perhaps not so far apart: ``getting people research, users clearly identify cultural issues
to share their knowledge requires not only as the largest obstacles to implementing
new processes but also a new covenant knowledge management'' (1998, p. 49).
between employer and employees'' (Hibbard In this review of the literature we have
and Carillo, 1998). identified a host of potential problems. The
Yet knowledge sharing across danger of IT/IS dominance clearly looms
heterogeneous groups may be more difficult, large in previous analyses. So too the need to
yet ultimately more rewarding (Gibbons et al., have a clear business rationale for pursuing a
1994). Dialogue can lead to conflict and KM initiative. And third, the needs of the
disagreement rather than necessarily to `ùsers'' have to be taken seriously into
agreement. Issues of power and exclusion account. All of these we accept as valid points.
may therefore come to the fore. Moreover, the However, as our case which follows will show,
introduction of information technology can these nostrums only begin to scratch the
be used on the one hand to reinforce expert surface of the managerial dilemmas which
power or on the other hand to challenge it. emerge when, even in the relatively propitious
Neither is pre-given by the technology itself. setting of a knowledge-rich business which is
In addition, the literature warns that underpinned by technology and operational
``technology alone won't make a person with experience, a new knowledge management
148
programme is launched for the first time in company that could represent opportunities
earnest. for learning, knowledge and insight
development are proposed. The need for
``learning to learn'' is especially noted. The
The International Resources case discussion following the presentation is
preliminary and exploratory ± the topic is new
We now return to the conference centre scene to many and clearly of dubious validity to
which opened this article. You will recall that some who are in attendance. However, the
the senior managers are gathered together to presence of a key executive sponsor becomes
debate the launch of a new learning clear and this very much helps to keep the
organization/knowledge management proposal live. Syndicate groups are appointed
initiative. Those assembled, by and large, to debate and report in depth on the main
know each other ± they work, or have worked, agenda topics and the learning/knowledge
this corporate stage together for many years. team duly retires to the sunlit terrace armed
They know the history, the political agendas, with flipchart and coloured pens.
the gossip. Many aspects of the occasion are a The discussion is driven, as generally
reworking of previous performances: the happens in syndicates, by a couple of
enigmatic, possibly disapproving, reticent enthusiasts, and the results reflect this. The
members again enacting their familiar role, plenary report-back talks about culture,
and those usually relied on to offer removing the fear of failure, looking outside
commentary on each and every topic once the box, and the importance of adaptation to
more providing the entertaining thrust and change and uncertainty. The benefits of the
parry of debate. A number of people look new knowledge management initiative are
forward, with real concern, to achieving described in terms specific to the company.
constructive consensus and commitment on They include the potential contribution to be
fundamental issues facing the company; the made to the organization's declared
price of the commodity which is the commitment to teamwork-through-
foundation of their business, always volatile, innovation; clarity of purpose; and the
is beginning one of its nosedives at the same recruitment and retention of quality staff.
time that the under-performance of certain Sharing of the mass of often tacit knowledge
key projects are adding real business risks. represented by the collective technical and
The market and the analysts are less than operational experience of the company's
enthusiastic. world-wide staff is seen as key to cost-
The impacts of low prices, management of effectiveness, competitiveness and the
performance and risk and environmental management of business risks.
issues are all high on the agenda for this Setting up a project team is recommended,
meeting. Lower on the agenda, but with some and an action list presented which has, at the
executive sponsorship, is a subject which is top, sponsorship and active participation
something of a surprise to some of those (``walking the talk'') by executive
present ± ``Knowledge management and the management. Managers of the business units
learning organization''. Papers on learning are identified as the key ± knowledge sharing
and knowledge management have been and helping the business across organizational
circulated prior to the meeting, although what boundaries have to be explicit objectives in
proportion of the audience has bothered to their performance contracts, otherwise their
read them remains very much open to people's time will just not be available for
question. these activities. Cross-organizational and
A short presentation is given, outlining the functional peer groups (``communities of
linkages in the view that strategy is about practice'') need to be identified and activated,
business purpose combined with developing the intranet needs to be used as a tool,
insights, insight is about creativity and processes to recognise innovation need to be
learning, and learning is key to considered and clear communication to all
competitiveness. Some definitions of learning stakeholders is critical.
and knowledge are highlighted and the During the discussion, a core of participants
benefits of working with this perspective in who either have experience of knowledge
mind are summarised. Specific examples of management in other companies, or who buy
processes, culture and behaviours within the into the need for it here, becomes apparent.
149
Crucially, equally apparent are the early signs should have his own home page, ideally
of resistance from business unit managers interactive, through which he could ``chat''
who see the expenditure of time and effort on with the organization and behind which
this initiative as directly conflicting with their would be a cascading series of pages from
immediate business targets. Concerns are also management, business units and functions
expressed over managing or controlling the that would provide the basis for the awareness
quality of shared knowledge, its proprietary campaign.
sensitivity and the breadth of the potential Interestingly, there was a considerable
audience within the company. divergence of views as to whether only staff
Nevertheless, the actions agreed at the above a certain job grade should be included
conclusion of the meeting include, albeit with in this awareness and whether long-term
rumbling undercurrents of scepticism, the contractors (of whom there were a significant
establishment of a learning organization/ number) should be excluded. The decision
knowledge management project team. was eventually reached that privilege and
discrimination had no place in the new
knowledge-based learning organization.
Implementation ± phase 1 Further issues arose of how to involve the
overseas offices (from an intranet hardware
Thus was the initiative started. The project perspective rather than, perhaps more
team was appointed by the usual smoke from crucially, a cross-cultural one), who would
the Vatican chimney process, and made up of pay for the time involved in the learning
nine members: the sponsoring executive, the process, and what form of public recognition
technology and HR managers, the IT could be introduced for instances of
manager, three senior management innovation, knowledge sharing and so on (it
enthusiasts and two overseas business unit was felt that the company had a poor record
managers who were to participate by virtual of celebrating success).
means. Notably absent were representatives The principle of cross-discipline peer
of non-management employees but it was felt groups (``communities of practice'') was
that others could be brought into the process endorsed and a potential structure of
`às appropriate''. common business themes with similar
Five of these team members attended the challenges and expertise requirements was
first ``brainstorming'' meeting in June. put together. The concept was developed that
Awareness was identified as the immediate each should have its own ``champion''.
priority ± that is, ensuring that everyone in the Technology champions were already in place,
organization would know what was going on, each with their own intranet page. Peer
what projects were being worked on by reviews and post-project analysis were
whom, where specific technical experience identified as needs that should be formalised.
lay, what priority issues were preoccupying It was agreed that a proposal would be
the executives, and greater awareness about made to the executive committee, which in
what the board and shareholders were saying. due course was presented (by the executive
In addition, it was agreed by the team that members only of the project team). The
there needed to be a clearer understanding of proposal was fully endorsed by this
the company's strategy, the extent of progress committee. The endorsement included (to
being made in pursuing it, and individuals' the evident surprise of many) a commitment
responsibilities in relation to it. to significant ``cultural change'' to a more
Mechanisms for disseminating awareness open culture. Further, it was accepted that
and promoting feedback and ideas were the example for this had to be set from the top
drafted, including a more frequent use of in terms of dialogue and a demonstrably no
``town hall meetings'', routine reporting blame environment. The inevitable question
cascade (both downwards and upwards) and of measuring the impact of the project was
a much-expanded use of the intranet raised.
(although opinion varied on the current level The decision was made that this would be a
of use of the relatively new intranet, and the home-grown initiative ± external facilitation
IT manager was unable to provide any and guidance would not be sought, nor was it
relevant supporting data). A key considered a priority to seek advice from
recommendation was that the chief executive other companies in the industry and
150
elsewhere who already had gained experience chief executive's home page, along with the
of such programmes of change. The reason underlying information cascade, was drafted.
for this insularity was that the organization The idea that the project itself should have a
was still sensitive in the aftermath of a very home page to keep staff informed of what was
protracted ``business reengineering'' exercise going on was agreed, and actions on
which had been conducted by external knowledge champions, communities of
consultants. The decision to pursue this new practice, and peer reviews were divided up
project exclusively internally was in this amongst the group. The need to map the
context understandable but, in retrospect, current information-sharing processes and
turned out to be misguided. The concept of a evaluate their effectiveness was expressed.
pilot project never really arose; specific The IT manager was, unfortunately, ill and
components (for example peer groups) would unable to attend this meeting. Nevertheless in
be started on a trial basis, but the underlying his absence he was commissioned to report on
assumption, never fully examined, was that the capacity of the intranet and associated
the project as a whole would be rolled-out to issues ± including the international
the entire organization. The structural scale dimensions and upgrade cost options.
that this required and the fact that so little For the subsequent meeting at the end of
time was spent considering possible the month, a 12-page report from the IT
organizational barriers to an initiative department was submitted. This described all
originating from a small group of enthusiasts the constraints that the department was
also proved to be costly. working under but it committed IT to
developing the intranet as a vehicle for the
` ... Emphasis was placed on the cultural and knowledge management initiative ± albeit at
behavioural change imperatives and on alarmingly high potential costs. This was, in
the role of training and coaching... ' retrospect, the first clear warning sign not
only of IT barriers but of the perceived value
of the project to various parties as a tool to
In the meantime, initial feedback from the pursue political agendas. These problems
absent project team members was generally were however not realised at this stage. In part
positive. Emphasis was placed on the cultural the problems were hidden because requests
and behavioural change imperatives if from the project team were responded to in
knowledge sharing was to occur and emphasis highly technical terms and in a guarded way
was also placed on the role of training and which failed to reveal the extent of the
coaching. The appointment of a part-time potential issues.
``chief knowledge officer'' was recommended. The IT manager reported that the basic
It was also suggested (presciently as things company intranet would be available globally
turned out) that a dedicated IT resource by September, but with certain constraints on
might well be required. Failure to secure this data transmission volumes. A report on
eventually proved fatal. expansion plans and costs over the next year
Around this time, a note was issued to all and beyond was promised (but no issues were
staff introducing the new project. Its identified that could not be solved by money).
objectives were explained and emphasis was In the meantime a complete draft of the
given to the high level commitment to the project team's home page had been prepared
initiative by the company's top team. Little for comment, introducing the background to
formal feedback from this communication the learning and knowledge management
was received, but corridor conversations were project. It also expanded on the ``jigsaw
reassuring in so far as they seemed to reveal puzzle'' image of the four integrated
considerable grassroots enthusiasm. There dimensions of content, process, culture and
was a sense of positive anticipation combined infrastructure as outlined by Bock (1998).
with a requirement for clarification of exactly The structure of these and other additional
what was involved. Some members of the pages had already been designed and some
project team held town hall meetings with draft content had been prepared. More
their own staff and thus some level of content was being written, pilot communities
feedback was achieved. of practice had been identified and the
The next meeting of the project team was in responsibilities for developing them were
mid-July; the structure and philosophy of the allocated. The project was rolling.
151
The related issues of quantifying the communication, knowledge sharing and

business case and measuring potential results feedback and that these systems would be
were also initially addressed at this point. This simple, adequate and available. However,
was seen to be necessary especially since it there were now clear signs that these
was seeming likely that special funding for IT assumptions were not valid.
support would have to be sought. Moreover, The project team learnt, for the first time,
the business environment continued to that responsibilities for Website and intranet
deteriorate as prices fell. Examples of cost development within the company were,
savings that were identified included the inexplicably, divided between IT and media
savings in staff time achievable by knowledge affairs ± two departments with very different
sharing and the case was also made that there agendas, priorities and views on how to best
would be a lowering of investment risk, build and manage these processes. The
particularly with respect to technology as a sceptics in the team suspected that the KM
result of the wider availability of knowledge. and LO project had been viewed by the IT
In addition, it was suggested that there would function as a means to achieve a dominant
be increased quality of evaluation and a position in strategy, methodology and budget.
reduction of uncertainty leading to better This sceptical view was reinforced when it
investment decisions. emerged that external IT consultants were
being contracted by the IT function to
recommend the best way forward for both the

Implementation ± phase 2 intranet and IT systems in general. It became
difficult even for the KM project team to have
The team meeting in mid-August was confidence that the project's scope and targets
essentially both the high point of the project could actually be achieved when other
and the stage at which the weaknesses began priorities and agendas were potentially
to be more clearly visible. A great deal of competing.
progress had been made on drafting material Confidence among the project team
for the intranet, involving more people and members was further undermined by a
obtaining executive approvals. Targets were communication from the IT manager. This
set for the launch of the knowledge came in response to a request for hardware
management/learning organization home and resources commitment, improved co-
page (scheduled for early September) and the ordination, and a clear plan for developing an
chief executive's home page with its intranet system free from the instabilities that
underlying awareness structure (scheduled for were admitted in the existing one. The project
October). The delicate issue of defining team was surprised to hear that, in the IT
sensitive corporate information that could not view, insisting on `àppropriate hardware'' was
be included had been addressed and resolved a change of project priorities and would result
(with a clear agreement to be entirely open in other approved projects being put on hold.
with the organization in terms of what This included the delivery of the intranet to
knowledge could not be shared). The peer overseas locations, the issues associated with
review and other processes were being which were the responsibility of those
developed. An article for the company business units. The team also was advised
magazine was planned. that the purpose of the IT-initiated
The IT manager was not present at the consultancy study was to define an
meeting, but the team requested commitment outsourcing strategy, and that moreover the
from his department that the systems were in results would not be available until late
place to fully support the inauguration of the September. The appointment of an intranet
intranet pages world-wide on the agreed project manager would take several weeks.
schedule. In addition, assurance was also The next revelation was that the IT plan for
sought that sufficient dedicated resources intranet development was to rebuild it as a
were available to build and maintain these part of the document management system
systems (a ``Webmaster'' etc.). However, (DMS) in which significant, and high profile,
there was a growing realisation and investment had been made, but which, after a
consequent unease that the project had considerable length of time, was yet to be
developed essentially on the assumption that functional and useable to business benefit.
IT systems would be the foundation for This plan would represent a complete change
152
from the platform of the existing system and it launch of the project as a whole was clearly in
raised fundamental questions concerning jeopardy (the target date for the project home
interfaces. The intranet group in the media page launch having already passed). IT
affairs department were committed to reported that a decision needed to be taken
continue with the existing platform, arguing urgently on intranet standards, but that the
that it offered simplicity, flexibility, speed, prototype home pages would be assembled on
user-friendliness and cost-effective the DMS system ± the next meeting would be
commercial maintenance. They further convened when the prototype pages were
argued that moving to DMS would ready for demonstration. That was the last
significantly change the way in which the KM/ meeting of the project team.
LO sites would work. It was apparent to the
project team that these were significant
conflicts of views and that they provided the More pressing matters
backdrop to some, if not all, of the seemingly
inexplicable but elusive issues that had arisen During October, the deterioration in the
in the project to date. But the team, other industry market conditions paralleled that in
than the IT manager, did not have the the prospect of a decision on IT systems. The
expertise to understand, still less resolve, the company became, not surprisingly, more
fundamental technical issues underpinning consumed with survival than learning.
this controversy, and the only sources of In mid-November there was the
expertise were the very people who were announcement of a new project, this time to
locked in this territorial conflict. achieve major organizational restructuring in
response to the unsustainable market
conditions. This was to be managed by a
Implementation ± phase 3 small executive and senior management
group with the assistance of external
Time dragged by ± the basic material was ``specialists in organizational development
ready to go on the intranet, staff were curious and breakthrough thinking''. Late in the
as to what the status of the project was, and month a sweeping outsourcing and staff
the project team were frustrated but reduction programme was announced, and
apparently impotent, finally becoming aware the knowledge management initiative was lost
of the consequences of the focus on IT as the in the subsequent turbulence.
vehicle for a programme whose ambition
overwhelmed the capacity of a system already
weakened by political agendas. Discussion
No developments were forthcoming from
the IT department and the tensions were As the International Resources case
exacerbated by the broadcast (via an demonstrates, knowledge management
imprudent error in the instantaneous and initiatives are prone to fail even when they are
irrevocable act of e-mail addressee selection) reasonably well resourced and there appears
to a wider audience than intended of a note to be ample commitment from top
expressing the exasperation of one member of management. In this section of the paper we
the team and the suspicion that the seek to diagnose the causes of the failure of
commitment of the IT manager to the this initiative and to set this diagnosis in the
principles of the KM/LO initiative was very context of the wider literature on KM ±
much open to question. especially that portion of the literature which
The last meeting of the project team took tries to set out generalisable propositions
place in mid-September. Progress was about failure.
reported on all areas except for IT. Although A number of problems that the case study
the need for a knowledge-sharing culture was surfaces can be identified quite readily.
highlighted by the problems already First, top management was ``committed''
encountered in persuading potential only up to a point. As long as KM appeared
communities of practice around the world simply to be an add-on to the existing
that their practice was indeed common, this organization and seemed to promise greater
initiative was well underway. So too were the efficiency through the freer flow of
other components of the project but the information, the support was very evident.
153
However, the commitment did not extend to address them. To this extent, the team driving
a concerted willingness to overturn deeply this KM initiative, despite its relative
ingrained cultural practices of the sophistication in many other respects, was
organization. Crucially, when business open to the accusation of naõÈvety.
conditions began to deteriorate the safe Third, and of a more subsidiary nature,
response was perceived to be a reversal to more of these issues and tensions would have
traditional top-down methods. The principles been surfaced in a less costly and in a more
of a learning organization were not controlled way if a pilot for the KM initiative
instinctively realised as valuable or even had been tried in one part of the company
reliable during a period of crisis. This incident rather than planning for a total company-wide
was in this sense highly revealing: it points to launch. Similarly, insufficient attempt was
the KM/LO initiative as a ``nice to have'' made to benefit from the learning and
rather than a mission-critical activity. experience of other companies who had
Arguably, this is a widely held belief in the pursued similar initiatives. Likewise, no
majority of the companies which even get external advice or facilitation was sought. As
around to launching initiatives of this kind ± explained early in the case, there were
let alone those which merely toy with the particular reasons why this rather obvious
concept. To put this point another way, it point was neglected at the time. But in
would seem that there was a greater need to hindsight the lesson can be learned that this
ground the KM initiative in the firm's strategy temporary state of affairs was costly in its
± as Zack (1999) has recommended. eventual consequences.
So, to what extent do the lessons in the
` ... What is rather less usual about the case literature align with the problems faced in this
presented here is the level of fine- specific case? To put the point another way,
grained detail that we have been able how much more prepared would the project
to provide... ' team have been if they had read the KM
literature more carefully before they acted? As
we pointed out at the beginning of this article,
Second, as in so many other cases which we
the vast bulk of the KM literature is
have witnessed, the initiative was undermined
overwhelmingly optimistic and even
by divisions and differences in perspective
campaigning in nature and tone (Stewart,
between diverse functional ``camps''. In
1997; Huseman and Goodman, 1998). As
particular, the IT/IS department had its own
such most of it pays little regard to the
``take'' on what the programme meant. In line
problems and barriers. That small section of
with experience from other cases, this
the literature which is alert to the difficulties
particular group perceived the programme as
(for example, Lucier and Torsiliera, 1997;
fitting within a broader vision which they
Ruggles, 1998; Scarbrough, 1999; Swan,
already had for the future IT infrastructure.
1999) reports four main problems:
Initiatives of this nature rarely arrive on virgin
(1) an insufficiently specific business
territory. Here there was already underway a
objective. Instead companies launching
well-developed plan for intranet development
knowledge management initiatives tend
founded on a new document management
towards more general aspirations such as
system. Aspirations and reputations were at
``share best practice'';
stake and not surprisingly the IT specialists
(2) incomplete programme architecture that
sought to safeguard the integrity of their pre-
fails to build on the linked dynamics of
existing plans and investment. In this context,
organizational change and learning;
arguably the project team did not spend
(3) an insufficient focus on one or two
enough time listening to and understanding
strategic business priorities;
the perceptions and intentions of this crucial
(4) top management sponsorship without
group. Meanwhile, another group, in this
active ongoing involvement.
case, the media affairs department, was also
an influential party which had its own agenda These sorts of issues certainly find resonance
concerning corporate communications. The in our case. What is rather less usual about the
KM project team failed to appreciate the case presented here when compared with
complexity of these micro-political processes, most other studies, is the level of fine-grained
nor did it appear to have the authority to detail that we have been able to provide. This
154
detail is necessary in order to fully appreciate new knowledge is used as a basis for a
the meaning and reality of these rather shift in the kind of services and products
abstract concepts. We suggest in this article, offered to customers. These different
that any change agent contemplating expectations should be clarified.
involvement in a new KM initiative can learn
Finally, we should note that the concept of
a great deal from the detail of the dynamics
``failure'' (especially so from a knowledge
described in our case. The warnings are
management perspective) is somewhat
present and there are concrete lessons to be
learned. Here we highlight six: problematical because it is possible that
(1) Listen very carefully to the expectations, valuable lessons may be learned and/or that
agendas and wants of all parties involved. initiatives may be resuscitated at a later date.
They may appear to be using the same The latter already seems to be evident in the
language and to be supporting the case of International Resources, the former is
programme but in fact their at present more open to question.
understandings and plans may be very
different.
(2) Check continuously that top References
management support is continuing and is
delivered in a practical and public way. Argyres, N. (1996), ``Capabilities, technological
diversification and divisionalization'', Strategic
(3) Be alert to the potential differences

Management Journal, Vol. 17, pp. 395-410.
between a paradigm based on knowledge Blackler, F. (1995), ``Knowledge, knowledge work and
management which is IT-led and infused organisations: an overview and interpretation'',
with priorities relating to knowledge Organization Studies, Vol.16 No. 6, pp. 1021-47.
capture, archiving and mining, and one Bock, F. (1998), ``The intelligent organisation'', Prism
based on the learning organization (Arthur D. Little) 2nd quarter, pp.5-15.
Cheng, Y.T. and Van de Ven, A.H. (1996), ``Learning the
concept which may be inspired by wider
innovation journey: order out of chaos?'',
developmental values. If handled with
Organization Science, Vol. 7, pp. 593-614.
extraordinary skill the two approaches Cohen, S. (1998), ``Knowledge management's killer
may reinforce each other but this cannot applications'', Training and Development, Vol. 52
be expected simply to occur by No.1, pp. 50-7.
happenchance. Davenport, T. and Prusak, L. (1998), Working Knowledge:
(4) It will be found useful to ensure that the How Organizations Manage What They Know,
Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
purpose and reason for expending effort
Doz, Y., Angelmar, R. et al. (1987), ``Technological
on knowledge sharing is clarified and innovation and interdependence: a challenge for the
understood by everyone involved. It large complex firm'', Technology in the Modern
needs to be seen to be useful to those who Corporation, M. Horwitch, Pergamon Press, New
are, in effect, being asked to behave York, NY.
differently. Drucker, P. (1993), Post-Capitalist Society, HarperCollins,
(5) The interrelationship between knowledge New York, NY.
DTI (1998), The Competitiveness White Paper, Department
sharing, knowledge creation and
of Trade and Industry, London.
organizational change needs to be Edvinsson, L. and Sullivan, P. (1996), ``Developing a model
understood and realised. Reversal to for managing intellectual capital'', European
traditional ways of operating based on Management Journal, Vol.14 No. 4, pp. 356-65.
low trust and direct command are too Gibbons, M., Limoges, C. et al. (1994), The New
easily adopted when problems arise ± as Production of Knowledge, Sage, London.
Grant, R.M. (1996), ``Toward a knowledge-based theory of
our case demonstrates.
the firm'', Strategic Management Journal, Vol.17,
(6) If knowledge is to be more widely shared pp.109-22.
and more readily created and used, there Hamel, G. (1991), ``Competition for competence and
is an implication that innovation in interpartner learning within international strategic
process and probably service or products alliances'', Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 12,
will also ensue and indeed should be pp. 83-103.
Hibbard, J. and Carillo, K.M. (1998), ``Knowledge
sought. There are different types or levels
revolution'', Informationweek, Vol. 5 No. 663,
of organizational KM systems: at the
pp. 49-54.
lower level expert practitioners simply Huseman, R.C. and Goodman, J. (1998), Leading with
make available their operating routines Knowledge: The Nature of Competition in the 21st
and information. At the second level, the Century, Sage, London.
155
Koffman, F. and Senge, P. (1993), ``Communities of theory'', Journal of Organizational Change

commitment: the heart of the learning Management, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 63-78.
organization'', Organizational Dynamics, Autumn, Stewart, T.A. (1991), ``Brainpower'', Fortune, Vol. 123
pp. 4-23. No. 11, pp. 44-60.
KPMG, M.C. (1998), Knowledge Management Research Stewart, T.A. (1997), Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth
Report, KPMG Website, London. of Organizations, Nicholas Brealy, London.
Lam, A. (1998), Tacit Knowledge, Organizational Learning Swan, J. (1999), Introduction, Case Studies in Knowledge
and Innovation: A Societal Perspective, British Management, in Scarbrough, H. and Swan, J., IPD,
Academy of Management, Nottingham. London.
Lucier, C. and Torsiliera, J. (1997), ``Why knowledge Tsoukas, H. (1996), ``The firm as a distributed knowledge
programs fail'', Strategy and Business, 4th quarter, system: a constructionist approach'', Strategic
pp. 14-28. Management Journal, Vol. 17, Winter (special
Mintzberg, H. (1998), ``Covert leadership: notes on issue), pp. 11-25.
managing professionals'', Harvard Business Review, Zack, M.H. (1999), ``Developing a knowledge strategy'',
November-December, pp.140-7. California Management Review, Vol. 41 No. 3,
Mulhotra, Y. (1998), ``Tools@work: deciphering the pp. 125-45.
knowledge management hype'', The Journal of
Quality and Participation, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 58-60.
Nelson, R.R. and Winter, S. (1982), An Evolutionary
Theory of Economy Change, Cambridge University
Further reading
Press, Cambridge, MA.
Cole-Gomolski, B. (1997), `Ùsers loathe to share their
Nonaka, I. (1994), `À dynamic theory of organizational
know-how'', Computerworld, Vol. 31 No. 46, p. 6.
knowledge creation'', Organization Science, Vol. 5

Fulmer, R. and Gibbs, P. (1998), ``The second generation
No.1, pp.14-36.
learning organization: new tools for sustaining
Penrose, E. (1959), The Theory of the Growth of the Firm,
competitive advantage'', Organizational Dynamics,
Wiley, New York, NY. Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 6-20.
Polanyi, M. (1962), Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post- Green, K. et al. (1998), ``Differences in `styles' of
critical Philosophy, University of Chicago Press, technological innovations; introduction to special
Chicago, IL. issue'', Technology Analysis & Strategic
Polanyi, M. (1966), The Tacit Dimension, Doubleday, New Management, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 403-7.
York, NY. Hansen, M.T. and Nohria, N. (1999), ``What's your
Prusack, L. (Ed.) (1997), Knowledge in Organizations, strategy for managing knowledge?'', Harvard
Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, MA. Business Review, March-April, pp. 106-16.
Quinn, J.B. (1992), ``The intelligent enterprise: a new Holtshouse, D. (1998), ``Knowledge research issues'',
paradigm'', The Academy of Management California Management Review, Vol. 40 No. 3,
Executive, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 48-64. pp. 277-81.
Reich, R. (1992), The Work of Nations, Vintage Press, New Leonard, D. and Sensiper, S. (1998), ``The role of tacit
York, NY. knowledge in group innovation'', California
Ruggles, R. (1998), ``The state of the notion: knowledge Management Review, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 112-33.
management in practice'', California Management Lundvall, B. (1998), ``Why study national systems and
Review, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 80-9. national styles of innovation?'', Technology Analysis
Scarbrough, H. and Swan, J. (1999), Case Studies in & Strategic Management, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 407-22.
Knowledge Management, IPD, New York, NY. Lundvall, B.-A. (1992), National Systems of Innovation:
Scarbrough, H., Swan, J. et al. (1999), Knowledge Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive
Management: A Literature Review, IPD, London. Learning, Pinter, London.
Schon, D.A. (1983), The Reflective Practitioners: How Nonaka, I. (1991), ``The knowledge creating company'',
Professionals Think in Action, Arena, London. Harvard Business Review, November-December,
Skyrme, D.J. and Amidon, D.M. (1998), ``New measures of pp. 96-104.
success'', The Journal of Business Strategy, Vol. 19 Nonaka, I.a.T., H. (1995), The Knowledge-Creating
No. 1, pp. 20-4. Company: How Japanese Companies Create the
Spender, J.C. (1996a), ``Making knowledge the basis of a Dynamics of Innovation, Oxford University Press,
dynamic theory of the firm'', Strategic Management Oxford.
Journal, Vol. 17, Winter (special issue), pp. 45-62. von Krogh, G., Nonaka, I. and Ichijo, K. (1997), ``Develop
Spender, J.C. (1996b), `Òrganizational knowledge, knowledge activists'', European Management
learning and memory: three concepts in search of a Journal, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 475-83.
156
This article has been cited by:
1. Hakan Tarakci. 2016. Two types of learning effects on maintenance activities. International Journal of Production Research
54:6, 1721-1734. [CrossRef]
2. Khuram Shahzad Department of Management, University of Management and Technology, Lahore, Pakistan Sami Ullah
Bajwa Department of Management, University of Management and Technology, Lahore, Pakistan Ahmed Faisal Imtiaz
Siddiqi Department of Quantitative Methods, University of Management and Technology, Lahore, Pakistan Farhan Ahmid
Department of Business Administration, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology, Lahore, Pakistan Ali Raza Sultani
Hailey College of Commerce, Punjab University, Lahore, Pakistan . 2016. Integrating knowledge management (KM) strategies
and processes to enhance organizational creativity and performance. Journal of Modelling in Management 11:1, 154-179.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
3. Dr Stefano Zambon Stefan Schaper Independent researcher . 2016. Contemplating the usefulness of intellectual capital
reporting. Journal of Intellectual Capital 17:1, 52-82. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
4. Victor Martin-Perez Business Department, University of Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain Natalia Martin-Cruz Department of
Business, University of Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain . 2015. The mediating role of affective commitment in the rewards–
knowledge transfer relation. Journal of Knowledge Management 19:6, 1167-1185. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
5. Li Pin Tan Department of Manufacturing and Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Universiti
Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai, Malaysia Kuan Yew Wong Department of Manufacturing and Industrial Engineering, Faculty of
Mechanical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai, Malaysia . 2015. Linkage between knowledge management
and manufacturing performance: a structural equation modeling approach. Journal of Knowledge Management 19:4, 814-835.
6. Vincenzo Cavaliere Department of Economics and Management, University of Florence, Florence, Italy Sara Lombardi
Department of Business and Management, LUISS Guido Carli, Rome, Italy . 2015. Exploring different cultural
configurations: how do they affect subsidiaries’ knowledge sharing behaviors?. Journal of Knowledge Management 19:2,
141-163. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
7. Alina Ohotina, Olga Lavrinenko. 2015. Education of Employees and Investment Climate of the Region: The View of the
Heads of Enterprises. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 174, 3873-3877. [CrossRef]
8. Andreas Hartmann, André Dorée. 2015. Learning between projects: More than sending messages in bottles. International
Journal of Project Management 33:2, 341-351. [CrossRef]
9. Suzanne Zyngier, Aarti NagpalKnowledge Management Ethics: Located within a Governance Framework 3990-3999.
[CrossRef]
10. Hongyi Mao, Shan Liu, Jinlong ZhangIT Resource and Competitive Advantage: Role of Knowledge Management Capability
and Resource Commitment 3791-3800. [CrossRef]
11. S. Ahmed-Kristensen, G. Vianello. 2015. A model for reusing service knowledge based on an empirical case. Research in
Engineering Design 26:1, 57-76. [CrossRef]
12. Stephen Leybourne, Monica Kennedy. 2015. Learning to Improvise, or Improvising to Learn: Knowledge Generation and
‘Innovative Practice’ in Project Environments. Knowledge and Process Management 22:1, 1-10. [CrossRef]
13. RajagopalReasoned Action and Planned Behavior 30-65. [CrossRef]
14. Mariel A. Ale, Carlos M. Toledo, Omar Chiotti, María R. Galli. 2014. A conceptual model and technological support for
organizational knowledge management. Science of Computer Programming 95, 73-92. [CrossRef]
15. Peter Massingham Director of Centre for Knowledge Management based at Faculty of Business, University of Wollongong,
Wollongong, Australia . 2014. An evaluation of knowledge management tools: Part 1 – managing knowledge resources.
Journal of Knowledge Management 18:6, 1075-1100. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
16. Peter Massingham Director of Centre for Knowledge Management based at Faculty of Business, University of Wollongong,
Wollongong, Australia . 2014. An evaluation of knowledge management tools: Part 2 – managing knowledge flows and
enablers. Journal of Knowledge Management 18:6, 1101-1126. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
17. Caroline F Benton, Rémy Magnier-Watanabe. 2014. The impact of commitment, empowerment, embeddedness on
knowledge management in domestic and foreign-affiliated firms in Japan. Knowledge Management Research & Practice 12:2,
161-174. [CrossRef]
18. Peter Rex Massingham School of Management, Operations and Marketing, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia
Rada K Massingham School of Accounting, University of Western Sydney, Campbelltown, NSW, Australia . 2014. Does
knowledge management produce practical outcomes?. Journal of Knowledge Management 18:2, 221-254. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
19. Mahdavi Mazdeh Mohammad Industrial Engineering Department, Iran University of Science & Technology, Tehran, Iran
Hesamamiri Roozbeh Industrial Engineering Department, Iran University of Science & Technology, Tehran, Iran . 2014.
Knowledge management reliability and its impact on organizational performance. Program 48:2, 102-126. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
20. RajagopalThe Entrepreneurial Mindset 31-57. [CrossRef]
21. David Boyd. 2013. Using events to connect thinking and doing in knowledge management. Construction Management and
Economics 31:11, 1144-1159. [CrossRef]
22. Mohamed A.F. Ragab College of Business, Dublin Institute of Technology, Dublin, Ireland Amr Arisha College of Business,
Dublin Institute of Technology, Dublin, Ireland . 2013. Knowledge management and measurement: a critical review. Journal
of Knowledge Management 17:6, 873-901. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
23. Hesamamiri Roozbeh Industrial Engineering Department, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran Mahdavi
Mazdeh Mohammad Industrial Engineering Department, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran Jafari
Mostafa Industrial Engineering Department, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran . 2013. Measuring the
reliability of knowledge management. Aslib Proceedings 65:5, 484-502. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
24. Ajay K. JainBased in the Department of Psychology and Behavioural Sciences, School of Business and Social Sciences, Aarhus
University, Aarhus, Denmark Hans Jeppe JeppesenBased in the Department of Psychology and Behavioural Sciences, School
of Business and Social Sciences, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark. 2013. Knowledge management practices in a public
sector organisation: the role of leaders' cognitive styles. Journal of Knowledge Management 17:3, 347-362. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
25. Hanan Al MehairiEmpowering Knowledge Sharing Behaviours through Means Oriented vs. Goal Oriented Cultures: The
Impact of Organizational Culture on Knowledge Sharing 702-705. [CrossRef]
26. Angela Lee Siew Hoong, Tong-Ming Lim, Rasimah AripinThe Role of Affect on the Acceptance of Web 2.0 as
Organizational Knowledge Sharing Systems 450-455. [CrossRef]

27. Nuria Forcada, Alba Fuertes, Marta Gangolells, Miquel Casals, Marcel Macarulla. 2013. Knowledge management perceptions
in construction and design companies. Automation in Construction 29, 83-91. [CrossRef]
28. Danny Ardianto. 2013. The Role of Knowledge Management Governance. International Journal of Computer Theory and
Engineering 133-137. [CrossRef]
29. Mohammadbashir Sedighi, Fardad ZandKnowledge management: Review of the Critical Success Factors and development of
a conceptual classification model 1-9. [CrossRef]
30. Gian CasimirBased at Newcastle Business School, The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia Karen LeeBased
in the Department of Management, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Kowloon, Hong Kong, PRC
Mark LoonBased in the School of Business and Management, The University of Gloucestershire, Cheltenham, UK. 2012.
Knowledge sharing: influences of trust, commitment and cost. Journal of Knowledge Management 16:5, 740-753. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
31. Trevor A. Smith, Annette M. Mills, Paul Dion. 2012. Linking Business Strategy and Knowledge Management Capabilities
for Organizational Effectiveness. International Journal of Knowledge Management 6:3, 22-43. [CrossRef]
32. Stavros T. Ponis, Epaminondas Koronis. 2012. A Knowledge Management Process-Based Approach to Support Corporate
Crisis Management. Knowledge and Process Management 19:3, 148-159. [CrossRef]
33. Lena Aggestam, Per Backlund, Anne Persson. 2012. Supporting Knowledge Evaluation to Increase Quality in Electronic
Knowledge Repositories. International Journal of Knowledge Management 6:1, 23-43. [CrossRef]
34. James M Bloodgood, Michael A Chilton. 2012. Performance implications of matching adaption and innovation cognitive
style with explicit and tacit knowledge resources. Knowledge Management Research & Practice 10:2, 106-117. [CrossRef]
35. Fariza H. RuslyDepartment of Management Systems, Waikato Management School, University of Waikato, Hamilton,
New Zealand James L. CornerDepartment of Management Systems, Waikato Management School, University of Waikato,
Hamilton, New Zealand Peter SunThe Centre for Corporate and Executive Education, Waikato Management School,
University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand. 2012. Positioning change readiness in knowledge management research.
Journal of Knowledge Management 16:2, 329-355. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
36. Andreas SchroederSenior Lecturer at the Business School, University of Buckingham, Buckingham, UK David
PauleenAssociate Professor at the School of Management, Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand Sid HuffSchool
of Information Management, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand. 2012. KM governance: the
mechanisms for guiding and controlling KM programs. Journal of Knowledge Management 16:1, 3-21. [Abstract] [Full Text]
[PDF]
37. Kah-Hin Chai, J. Nebus. 2012. Personalization or Codification? A Marketing Perspective to Optimize Knowledge Reuse
Efficiency. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 59:1, 33-51. [CrossRef]
38. Morteza Dehaghi. 2012. Reverse Engineering: A Way of Technology Transfer in Developing Countries like Iran. International
Journal of e-Education, e-Business, e-Management and e-Learning . [CrossRef]
39. Carolina López-Nicolás, Ángel L. Meroño-Cerdán. 2011. Strategic knowledge management, innovation and performance.
International Journal of Information Management 31:6, 502-509. [CrossRef]
40. SUKANLAYA SAWANG, KERRIE L. UNSWORTH. 2011. A MODEL OF ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION
IMPLEMENTATION EFFECTIVENESS IN SMALL TO MEDIUM FIRMS. International Journal of Innovation
Management 15:05, 989-1011. [CrossRef]
41. Haitham Alali, Juhana SalimInformation system success and acceptance theories: Towards developing a “virtual
communities of practice” success model 306-312. [CrossRef]
42. Michelle Soakell‐HoDepartment of Information Systems and Operations Management, University of Auckland Business
School, Auckland, New Zealand Michael D. MyersDepartment of Information Systems and Operations Management,
University of Auckland Business School, Auckland, New Zealand. 2011. Knowledge management challenges for
nongovernment organizations. VINE 41:2, 212-228. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
43. Deborah Blackman, Monica Kennedy, Brent Ritchie. 2011. Knowledge management: the missing link in DMO crisis
management?. Current Issues in Tourism 14:4, 337-354. [CrossRef]
44. Carmen Camelo-Ordaz, Joaquín García-Cruz, Elena Sousa-Ginel, Ramón Valle-Cabrera. 2011. The influence of human
resource management on knowledge sharing and innovation in Spain: the mediating role of affective commitment. The
International Journal of Human Resource Management 22:7, 1442-1463. [CrossRef]
45. Hsiu‐Fen LinDepartment of Shipping and Transportation Management, National Taiwan Ocean University, Taiwan.
2011. Antecedents of the stage‐based knowledge management evolution. Journal of Knowledge Management 15:1, 136-155.
46. Chihab BenMoussa. 2010. Investigating Barriers to Knowledge Management Success: A Conceptual Model and a Comparative
Case Analysis. Journal of Information & Knowledge Management 09:04, 303-318. [CrossRef]
47. Yen-Ching OuYang, Jen-Yin Yeh, Te-Chun LeeThe critical success factors for knowledge management adoption - a review
study 445-448. [CrossRef]
48. Heather Smith, James McKeen, Satyendra Singh. 2010. Creating the KM mindset: why is it so difficult?. Knowledge
Management Research & Practice 8:2, 112-120. [CrossRef]
49. Will Venters. 2010. Knowledge management technology-in-practice: a social constructionist analysis of the introduction and
use of knowledge management systems. Knowledge Management Research & Practice 8:2, 161-172. [CrossRef]
50. Chimay J. Anumba, Doris PulsiferKnowledge Management Systems for Construction 687-696. [CrossRef]
51. Nor Intan Saniah Sulaiman, Maria Burke. 2009. A case analysis of knowledge sharing implementation and job searching in
Malaysia. International Journal of Information Management 29:4, 321-325. [CrossRef]
52. Murray E. JennexSan Diego State University, San Diego, California, USA Stefan SmolnikEuropean Business School (EBS),
Reichartshausen, Germany David T. CroasdellUniversity of Nevada, Reno, Nevada, USA. 2009. Towards a consensus
knowledge management success definition. VINE 39:2, 174-188. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
53. Wing LamDean, based at U21 Global, Singapore Alton Y.K. ChuaAssistant Professor, based at Nanyang Technological
University, Singapore. 2009. Knowledge outsourcing: an alternative strategy for knowledge management. Journal of Knowledge
Management 13:3, 28-43. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
54. S M Jasimuddin, Z Zhang. 2009. The symbiosis mechanism for effective knowledge transfer. Journal of the Operational
Research Society 60:5, 706-716. [CrossRef]
55. Peter MassinghamCentre for Knowledge Management, School of Management and Marketing, University of Wollongong,
Wollongong, Australia Kieren DimentCentre for Knowledge Management, School of Management and Marketing, University
of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia. 2009. Organizational commitment, knowledge management interventions, and
learning organization capacity. The Learning Organization 16:2, 122-142. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
56. Chihab BenMoussaImpediments to Knowledge Management 322-329. [CrossRef]
57. Tom Butler, Joseph Feller, Andrew Pope, Bill Emerson, Ciaran Murphy. 2008. Designing a core IT artefact for Knowledge
Management Systems using participatory action research in a government and a non-government organisation. The Journal
of Strategic Information Systems 17:4, 249-267. [CrossRef]
58. Li Feng YangOn Some Issues of Knowledge Management System: A Review 1-6. [CrossRef]
59. Abdulaziz O. Alsadhan, Mohamed Zairi, Kay Hooi Alan Keoy. 2008. From P Economy to K Economy: An empirical study
on knowledge-based quality factors. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 19:7-8, 807-825. [CrossRef]
60. Sanjay Kumar SinghSanjay Kumar Singh is based at the Institute of Management Technology, Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad, India..
2008. Role of leadership in knowledge management: a study. Journal of Knowledge Management 12:4, 3-15. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
61. Alton Y.K. ChuaSchool of Communication and Information, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore Dion H.
GohSchool of Communication and Information, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. 2008. Look before you leap.
Aslib Proceedings 60:4, 335-348. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
62. Kripa Shanker Gupta. 2008. A comparative analysis of knowledge sharing climate. Knowledge and Process Management 15:3,
186-195. [CrossRef]
63. Terry Williams. 2008. How Do Organizations Learn Lessons From Projects—And Do They?. IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management 55:2, 248-266. [CrossRef]
64. Sajjad M. JasimuddinSchool of Management and Business, University of Wales – Aberystwyth, Aberystwyth, UK. 2008. A
holistic view of knowledge management strategy. Journal of Knowledge Management 12:2, 57-66. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
65. Carolina L, MeroStrategic KM, Innovation and Performance 811-816. [CrossRef]
66. Bill Martin. 2008. Knowledge management. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 42:1, 369-424. [CrossRef]
67. Murray E. Jennex, Stefan Smolnik, David CroasdellTowards Measuring Knowledge Management Success 360-360. [CrossRef]
68. Kirti Ruikar, Chimay J Anumba, Charles Egbu. 2007. Integrated use of technologies and techniques for construction
knowledge management. Knowledge Management Research & Practice 5:4, 297-311. [CrossRef]
69. Yvon DufourMacquarie Graduate School of Management, Macquarie University, Ryde, Australia. Peter SteaneMacquarie
Graduate School of Management, Macquarie University, Ryde, Australia.. 2007. Implementing knowledge management: a
more robust model. Journal of Knowledge Management 11:6, 68-80. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
70. Jyotsna Bhatnagar. 2007. Predictors of organizational commitment in India: strategic HR roles, organizational learning
capability and psychological empowerment. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 18:10, 1782-1811.
[CrossRef]
71. Lloyd C. HarrisCardiff Business School, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK Emmanuel OgbonnaCardiff Business School,
Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK. 2007. The impact of cultural and political dynamics on web site design, development, and
implementation. Personnel Review 36:6, 918-938. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
72. Zhikun Ding, Fungfai Ng, Qiying Cai. 2007. Personal constructs affecting interpersonal trust and willingness to share
knowledge between architects in project design teams. Construction Management and Economics 25:9, 937-950. [CrossRef]
73. Andreas SchroederSchool of Information Management, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand
David PauleenSchool of Information Management, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand. 2007.
KM governance: investigating the case of a knowledge intensive research organisation. Journal of Enterprise Information
74. Pauline Gleadle, Nelarine Cornelius, Eric Pezet and Graeme SalamanDuncan ShawAston Business School, Aston University,
Birmingham, UK Matthew HallAston Business School, Aston University, Birmingham, UK John S. EdwardsAston Business
School, Aston University, Birmingham, UK Brad BakerAston Business School, Aston University, Birmingham, UK. 2007.
Responding to crisis through strategic knowledge management. Journal of Organizational Change Management 20:4, 559-578.
75. Pauline Gleadle, Nelarine Cornelius, Eric Pezet and Graeme SalamanAlan LoweAston Business School, Birmingham, UK
Andrea McIntoshWaikato Management School, Hamilton, New Zealand. 2007. Knowledge management in a New Zealand
tree farming company. Journal of Organizational Change Management 20:4, 539-558. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
76. Angel L. Meroño‐CerdanDe Organización de Empresas, Campus de Espinardo, Universidad de Murcia, Murcia, Spain.
Carolina Lopez‐NicolasDe Organización de Empresas, Campus de Espinardo, Universidad de Murcia, Murcia, Spain.
Ramón Sabater‐SánchezDe Organización de Empresas, Campus de Espinardo, Universidad de Murcia, Murcia, Spain..
2007. Knowledge management strategy diagnosis from KM instruments use. Journal of Knowledge Management 11:2, 60-72.
77. Kevin J. O'SullivanNew York Institute of Technology, New York, New York, USA.. 2007. Creating and executing an internal
communications plan for knowledge management systems deployments. Journal of Knowledge Management 11:2, 102-108.
78. Rosemary McGuinnessCatherine KellySchool of Information Management, London Metropolitan University, London, UK.
2007. Managing the relationship between knowledge and power in organisations. Aslib Proceedings 59:2, 125-138. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
79. Kenneth Grant, Umair QureshiKnowledge Management Systems -- Why So Many Failures? 1-5. [CrossRef]
80. Ying‐Jung YehDepartment of Business Administration, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei,
Taiwan, Republic of China Sun‐Quae LaiDepartment of Industrial Engineering and Management, National Taipei University
of Technology, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China Chin‐Tsang HoDepartment of Accounting and Information Technology,
National Chung Cheng University, Min‐Hsuing Chia‐Yi, Taiwan, Republic of China. 2006. Knowledge management
enablers: a case study. Industrial Management & Data Systems 106:6, 793-810. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
81. Joe Tidd, Frank M. Hull. 2006. Managing service innovation: the need for selectivity rather than 'best practice'. New
Technology, Work and Employment 21:2, 139-161. [CrossRef]
82. Ahmed M. Al-Ghassani, John M. Kamara, Chimay J. Anumba, Patricia M. Carrillo. 2006. Prototype System for Knowledge
Problem Definition. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 132:5, 516-524. [CrossRef]
83. Alton Y. K. Chua. 2006. The rise and fall of a community of practice: a descriptive case study. Knowledge and Process
84. Duc Thanh Luu, S. Thomas Ng, Swee Eng Chen, Marcus Jefferies. 2006. A strategy for evaluating a fuzzy case-based
construction procurement selection system. Advances in Engineering Software 37:3, 159-171. [CrossRef]
85. Siong Choy Chong. 2006. KM Implementation and Its Influence on Performance: An Empirical Evidence from Malaysian
Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC) Companies. Journal of Information & Knowledge Management 05:01, 21-37. [CrossRef]
86. Josefa Ruiz-Mercader, Angel Luis Meroño-Cerdan, Ramón Sabater-Sánchez. 2006. Information technology and learning:
Their relationship and impact on organisational performance in small businesses. International Journal of Information
87. Patricia Carrillo, Paul Chinowsky. 2006. Exploiting Knowledge Management: The Engineering and Construction Perspective.
Journal of Management in Engineering 22:1, 2-10. [CrossRef]
88. Peter A.C. SmithThe Leadership Alliance Inc.Peter A.C. SmithThe Leadership Alliance Inc., Holland Landing, Canada.
2005. Knowledge sharing and strategic capital. The Learning Organization 12:6, 563-574. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
89. Wing LamUniversitas 21 Global, Singapore, Singapore Alton ChuaUniversitas 21 Global, Singapore, Singapore. 2005. The
mismanagement of knowledge management. Aslib Proceedings 57:5, 424-433. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
90. Andrew L.S. GohSessional Faculty Member at the International Graduate School of Management, University of South
Australia, Australia. He received his PhD and MSc degrees from the University of London. He has over 15 years of
professional experience in innovation and technology management, international business and policy management. He has
published extensively in internationally‐ renowned refereed journals, inter alia, the International Journal of Technology, Policy
& Management (IJTPM); the International Journal of Public Sector Management (IJPSM); the Journal for Institutional
Innovation, Development & Transition (JIIDT); the International Journal of Applied Management & Technology (IJAMT);
the International Journal of Innovation & Learning (IJIL); the Australian Journal of Information Systems (AJIS); and the
Journal of Knowledge Management Practice (JKMP). His current research interests lie in knowledge management, public
policy and strategy.. 2005. Harnessing knowledge for innovation: an integrated management framework. Journal of Knowledge
91. Alton ChuaAssistant Professor at Universitas 21 Global. Wing LamAssistant Professor at Universitas 21 Global.. 2005. Why
KM projects fail: a multi‐case analysis. Journal of Knowledge Management 9:3, 6-17. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
92. Kuan Yew Wong, Elaine Aspinwall. 2005. Knowledge Management: Case Studies in SMEs and Evaluation of an Integrated
Approach. Journal of Information & Knowledge Management 04:02, 95-111. [CrossRef]
93. Wei Zheng. 2005. A Conceptualisation of the Relationship Between Organisational Culture and Knowledge Management.
Journal of Information & Knowledge Management 04:02, 113-124. [CrossRef]
94. Kuan Yew WongDepartment of Manufacturing and Industrial Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Johor,
Malaysia. 2005. Critical success factors for implementing knowledge management in small and medium enterprises. Industrial
Management & Data Systems 105:3, 261-279. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
95. Paul Mulholland, Zdenek Zdrahal, John Domingue. 2005. Supporting continuous learning in a large organization: the role
of group and organizational perspectives. Applied Ergonomics 36:2, 127-134. [CrossRef]
96. A.M. Al‐GhassaniDepartment of Civil and Building Engineering, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK J.M.
KamaraSchool of Architecture, Planning and Landscape, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne,
UK C.J. AnumbaDepartment of Civil and Building Engineering, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK P.M.
CarrilloDepartment of Civil and Building Engineering, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK. 2004. An innovative
approach to identifying knowledge management problems. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management 11:5,
349-357. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
97. Yoav GalYoav Gal is working on his Ph.D. thesis at the Department of Business Administration, Ben Gurion University,
Beer Sheva, Israel (yoav_gal@zahav.net.il).. 2004. The reward effect: a case study of failing to manage knowledge. Journal of
Knowledge Management 8:2, 73-83. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
98. S. LichtensteinKnowledge development and creation in email 10 pp.. [CrossRef]
99. Lesley TreleavenA Knowledge-Sharing Approach to Organizational Change: A Critical Discourse Analysis 154-180.
[CrossRef]
100. Tom Butler. 2003. From data to knowledge and back again: understanding the limitations of KMS. Knowledge and Process
101. Donald Hislop. 2003. The Complex Relations Between Communities of Practice and the Implementation of Technological
Innovations. International Journal of Innovation Management 07:02, 163-188. [CrossRef]
102. Byounggu Choi, Heeseok Lee. 2003. An empirical investigation of KM styles and their effect on corporate performance.
Information & Management 40:5, 403-417. [CrossRef]
103. Donald HislopSheffield University Management School, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. 2003. Linking human resource
management and knowledge management via commitment. Employee Relations 25:2, 182-202. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
104. 2003. When knowledge adds up to nothing. Development and Learning in Organizations: An International Journal 17:1, 32-35.
[Abstract] [Full Text]
105. Adekunle Okunoye, Helena Karsten. 2002. Where The Global Needs The Local: Variation in Enablers in the Knowledge
Management Process. Journal of Global Information Technology Management 5:3, 12-31. [CrossRef]
106. Patricia Carrillo, Chimay Anumba. 2002. Knowledge management in the AEC sector: an exploration of the mergers and
acquisitions context. Knowledge and Process Management 9:3, 149-161. [CrossRef]
107. John M. Kamara, Chimay J. Anumba, Patricia M. Carrillo. 2002. A CLEVER approach to selecting a knowledge management
strategy. International Journal of Project Management 20:3, 205-211. [CrossRef]
108. Rikard Lindgren, Ola Henfridsson. 2002. Using Competence Systems: Adoption Barriers and Design Suggestions. Journal
of Information & Knowledge Management 01:01, 65-77. [CrossRef]
109. David G. WastellInformation Systems Institute, Salford University, Manchester, UK. 2001. Barriers to effective knowledge
management: Action research meets grounded theory. Journal of Systems and Information Technology 5:2, 21-36. [Abstract]
[PDF]
110. Meir Russ, Robert Fineman, Riccardo Paterni, Jeannette K. JonesHow Do We Get There? 442-476. [CrossRef]
111. Carolina López-Nicolás, Ángel L. Meroño-CerdánA Model for Knowledge Management and Intellectual Capital Audits
819-835. [CrossRef]
112. Andreas Schroeder, David Pauleen, Sid HuffGovernance and Leadership of Knowledge Management 46-61. [CrossRef]
113. Subramanian Rama Iyer, Ramesh Sharda, David Biros, Joyce Lucca, Upton ShimpOrganization of Lessons Learned
Knowledge 190-209. [CrossRef]

114. Knowledge Management 169-199. [CrossRef]
115. Murray E. Jennex, Stefan Smolnik, David CroasdellTowards a Consensus Knowledge Management Success Definition
403-415. [CrossRef]
116. Murray E. Jennex, Stefan Smolnik, David CroasdellTowards a Consensus Knowledge Management Success Definition 1-13.
[CrossRef]
117. S.M. JasimuddinStorage of Transferred Knowledge or Transfer of Stored Knowledge: Which Direction? If Both, Then How?
27a-27a. [CrossRef]
118. Maria E. Burke, Chris SpeedKnowledge Recovery 133-142. [CrossRef]
119. Trevor A. Smith, Annette M. Mills, Paul DionLinking Business Strategy and Knowledge Management Capabilities for
Organizational Effectiveness 186-207. [CrossRef]
120. Jean Éric PeletUsing Web 2.0 Social Computing Technologies to Enhance the Use of Information Systems in Organizations
101-132. [CrossRef]
121. Andreas Schroeder, David J. Pauleen, Sid L. HuffGovernance and Leadership of Knowledge Management 2085-2100.
[CrossRef]
122. Grippa Francesca, Elia GianlucaRecognizing Innovation through Social Network Analysis 2398-2419. [CrossRef]
123. Brandon OlsonAligning and Valuing Data-Based Wisdom Projects 141-155. [CrossRef]
124. M. Russ, J.K. JonesKnowledge-based strategies and information system technologies: preliminary findings 609-615.
[CrossRef]
125. Carolina López-Nicolás, Francisco-José Molina-CastilloPerceived Risks of Customer Knowledge Management 19-31.
[CrossRef]
126. Lena Aggestam, Per Backlund, Anne PerssonSupporting Knowledge Evaluation to Increase Quality in Electronic Knowledge
Repositories 24-44. [CrossRef]
127. Ángel L. Meroño-CerdánKnowledge Management Systems as a Framework for IT in Knowledge Management 611-616.
[CrossRef]
View publication stats

Knowledge Management Learning From Failure-Storey-2000

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Knowledge Management Learning From Failure-Storey-2000

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

See

Knowledge Management Initiatives: Learning

Article in Journal of Knowledge Management · June 2000

NIHR Clinical Leadership View project

Management development: a comparative study View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The research reported in this article derives from

The related issues of quantifying the communication, knowledge sharing and

recommend the best way forward for both the

(3) Be alert to the potential differences

Koffman, F. and Senge, P. (1993), ``Communities of theory'', Journal of Organizational Change

knowledge creation'', Organization Science, Vol. 5

Organizational Knowledge Sharing Systems 450-455. [CrossRef]

Knowledge 190-209. [CrossRef]

View publication stats

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen