The DOI matches its Crossref record; 118 of the 118 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A systematic review of knowledge management and knowledge sharing: Trends, issues, and challenges
Open accessAbstract
This study aims to highlight and summarize the possible antecedents and factors that facilitate or impede knowledge management and knowledge sharing in organizations. A meta-review of 64 articles for the years 2010–2015 has been conducted. It includes both quantitative and qualitative studies related to antecedents and barriers to knowledge management and knowledge sharing. Cooperation bias was the most frequent limitation in most studies included in this meta-review as the respondents were likely to over-estimate their participation in knowledge management (KM) and knowledge sharing (KS). Future studies of knowledge management and knowledge sharing can be focused on exploring the same issues in developing countries in different sectors. Relationship of knowledge sharing and transfer can be further explored with social media, organizational politics, and communication in the organizations. The result of meta-review will generate nomothetic knowledge implications by scrutinizing the antecedents and barriers to knowledge sharing and transfer.
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
Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393553 · Cited by 35,728
Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness
Granovetter, M. (1985) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/228311 · Cited by 28,745
The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780195092691.001.0001 · Cited by 18,010
Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind.
Triandis, H. C., & Hofstede, G. (1993) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393257 · Cited by 17,696
Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm
Grant, R. M. (1996) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250171110 · Cited by 16,157
The Knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation
(1997) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/s0048-7333(97)80234-x · Cited by 13,156
Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology
Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.3.3.383 · Cited by 12,939
Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3250961 · Cited by 10,176
Academy of Management Executive
(2010) · The Academy of Management executive/Academy of Management executive · doi:10.5465/ame · Cited by 8,844
Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm
Szulanski, G. (1996) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250171105 · Cited by 7,839
Cited by
Zamiri, M., & Esmaeili, A. (2024) · Administrative Sciences · doi:10.3390/admsci14010017 · Cited by 267
Salah, O. H., Yusof, Z. M., & Mohamed, H. (2021) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0243355 · Cited by 42
Metadata
- Authors
- Asrar-ul-Haq, M., & Anwar, S.
- Venue
- Cogent Business & Management
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2016-01-06
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1127744
- ISSN
- 2331-1975 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2227807253
- Cited by
- 361
- References
- 118
- FWCI
- 35.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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 systematic review of knowledge management and knowledge sharing: Trends, issues, and challenges. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/23311975.2015.1127744
- The paper
- Asrar-ul-Haq, M., & Anwar, S. (2016). A systematic review of knowledge management and knowledge sharing: Trends, issues, and challenges. Cogent Business & Management. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2015.1127744
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.
