The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Review of Knowledge Management Theory and Future Directions
Abstract
The focal point in the science of Management is to discover and formulate “laws of behavior” that will increase productivity. Nowadays, productivity depends on the ability of managers to create new knowledge and generate “smart” action. In the new economy, knowledge has become the primary factor of production and not machinery or financial capital as in the old industrial economy. Within the new business environment, a company's profitability depends, to a large extent, on its ability to learn and adapt. Learning ability has been proven to increase when organizations knowingly employ dynamic processes that help nurture, leverage and motivate people to improve and share their capacity to act. These processes encapsulate the notion of Knowledge Management (KM). Endeavoring to contribute in the development of managerial theory and KM theory in particular, this paper attempts to deliver two outcomes. Firstly, a historical account of KM theory identifies the current stage as the third phase of its development, whereby KM represents a social process. Secondly, the comprehensive literature review of KM provided proffers a new way of categorizing scholarly contributions into positivistic, interpretive with a resource-based orientation, interpretive with a knowledge-based orientation and organic approaches. Included are suggestions for theoretical avenues that may light the path for further development of this dynamic field. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage
Barney, J. (1991) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639101700108 · Cited by 48,334
A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation
Nonaka, I. (1994) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.5.1.14 · Cited by 17,809
The dynamic resource‐based view: capability lifecycles
Helfat, C. E., & Peteraf, M. A. (2003) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.332 · Cited by 4,553
What Firms Do? Coordination, Identity, and Learning
Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1996) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.7.5.502 · Cited by 3,078
Dynamic Capabilities: A Review of Past Research and an Agenda for the Future
Barreto, I. (2010) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206309350776 · Cited by 1,948
Cited by
Knowledge management: A global examination based on bibliometric analysis
Gaviria-Marin, M., Merigó, J. M., & Baier-Fuentes, H. (2019) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.006 · Cited by 560
Influencing models and determinants in big data analytics research: A bibliometric analysis
Aboelmaged, M., & Mouakket, S. (2020) · Information Processing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2020.102234 · Cited by 53
Metadata
- Authors
- Tzortzaki, A. M., & Mihiotis, A.
- Venue
- Knowledge and Process Management
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-01
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 29-41
- ISSN
- 1092-4604 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2104253856
- Cited by
- 162
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 40.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Review of Knowledge Management Theory and Future Directions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/kpm.1429
- The paper
- Tzortzaki, A. M., & Mihiotis, A. (2014). A Review of Knowledge Management Theory and Future Directions. Knowledge and Process Management. https://doi.org/10.1002/kpm.1429
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.