Cited by 0Knowledge Management and SharingHuman Resource and Talent ManagementInnovation and Knowledge Management

A Temporal Knowledge Continuity Framework: Explaining Delayed Performance Effects of Employee Turnover

Hussain, Syed Amjad·2026·Knowledge and Process Management

Abstract

Employee turnover threatens organizational performance primarily through the disruption of knowledge continuity, although its most consequential effects often emerge only after a temporal delay. Existing knowledge management research has extensively examined turnover, knowledge retention, and knowledge loss, yet it offers limited explanation of why performance deterioration frequently emerges only after employee departure rather than immediately. This paper develops a Temporal Knowledge Continuity Framework (TKCF) that conceptualizes employee turnover as a knowledge discontinuity shock and explains how delayed organizational consequences emerge over time. Drawing on the knowledge‐based view, knowledge retention theory, dynamic capabilities, and temporal process logic, the framework explains how turnover at t 0 initiates latent rupture in tacit expertise access, how tacit knowledge discontinuity emerges at t 1 when teams face ambiguity and coordination‐intensive demands, and how team performance deterioration becomes visible at t 2 through reduced decision quality, weakened innovation responsiveness, and increased coordination friction. The framework further positions knowledge management interventions—including mentoring, shadowing, communities of practice, structured handovers, and AI‐enabled continuity systems—as dynamic continuity capabilities that buffer the conversion of turnover shocks into tacit erosion. The paper contributes by extending the knowledge‐based view through a temporal explanation of knowledge continuity, identifying Tacit Knowledge Discontinuity as the missing intervening mechanism linking employee turnover to delayed performance deterioration, and repositioning knowledge management interventions as continuity‐preserving dynamic capabilities.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/kpm.70140

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Hussain, S. A.
Affiliations
University of Central Punjab (PK)
Corresponding author
Hussain, Syed Amjad
Venue
Knowledge and Process Management
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2026-08-04
ISSN
  • 1092-4604 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1441
OpenAlex
W7172407372
Cited by
0
References
1
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Knowledge and Process Management (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Knowledge Management and Sharing
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Human Resource and Talent Management
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
Keywords
employee turnover, knowledge continuity, tacit knowledge, knowledge retention, knowledge loss, knowledge-based view, dynamic capabilities, mentoring, shadowing, communities of practice, handover, team performance, coordination frictions

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