.png){kind=icon}
Return
On doing knowledge management
.png){kind=icon}
OA
AI
DOI：10.1057/palgrave.kmrp.8500160.png)
.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
Share.png){kind=icon}
Save
Abstract
En 中文
There is too little agreement on the nature of knowledge management (KM) among researchers and practitioners. This paper addresses the significance of this problem for evaluating KM as a discipline and discusses what to do to facilitate evaluation and to create conditions that will encourage self-organization around the most successful concepts of KM. The paper also presents a conceptual definition and specification of KM, and then uses aspects of it to analyze two primary approaches to KM: the DEC Interruption Approach, and the Background Conditions, or Ecological Approach. It analyzes the DEC Interruption Approach by sketching out an ideal pattern called the Open Enterprise Pattern, and presents an example of it in the Partners Healthcare Case. It then analyzes two contrasting significant examples of the Ecological Approach: the World Bank case, and the Halliburton case. Knowledge Management Research & Practice (2008) 6, 13-22. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.kmrp.8500160
Keywords:
knowledge management theory
knowledge management practice
knowledge creation
measurement
communities of practice
Journal
IF:
3.8
Papers:
909
Citations:
2.0K
Organization
No organization information available
.png){kind=icon}
