Purpose This study aims to identify the main knowledge processes associated with organizational knowledge culture. A diverse range of knowledge processes have been referred to in the extant literature, but little agreement exists on which knowledge processes are critical and should be supported by organizational culture. Design/methodology/approach Using a systematic literature review methodology, this study examined the primary literature – peer-reviewed and scholarly articles published in the top seven knowledge management and intellectual capital (KM/IC)-related journals. Findings The core knowledge processes have been identified – knowledge sharing, knowledge creation and knowledge implementation. The paper suggests that a strategy for implementing successful organizational KM initiatives requires precise understanding and effective management of the core knowledge infrastructures and processes. Although technology infrastructure is an important aspect of any KM initiative, the integration of knowledge into management decisions and practices relies on the extent to which the organizational culture supports or hinders knowledge processes. Research limitations/implications The focus of the study was on the articles published in the top seven KM/IC journals; important contributions in relevant publications in other KM journals, conference papers, books and professional reports may have been excluded. Practical implications Practitioners will benefit from a better understanding of knowledge processes involved in KM initiatives and investments. From a managerial perspective, the study offers an overview of the state of organizational knowledge culture research and suggests that for KM initiatives to be successful, the organization requires an integrated culture that is concerned with knowledge processes as a set of inextricably inter-related processes. Originality/value For the first time, a comprehensive list of diverse terms used in describing knowledge processes has been identified. The findings remove the conceptual ambiguity resulting from the inconsistent use of different terms for the same knowledge process by identifying the three major and overarching knowledge processes. Moreover, this study points to the need to attend to the inextricably interrelated nature of these three knowledge processes. Finally, this is the first time that a study provides evidence that shows the KM studies appear to be biased towards Knowledge sharing.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide a theoretical framework of how knowledge management (KM) systems can facilitate the incorporation of big data into strategic decisions. Advanced analytics are becoming increasingly critical in making strategic decisions in any organization from the private to public sectors and from for-profit companies to not-for-profit organizations. Despite the growing importance of capturing, sharing and implementing people’s knowledge in organizations, it is still unclear how big data and the need for advanced analytics can inform and, if necessary, reform the design and implementation of KM systems. Design/methodology/approach To address this gap, a combined approach has been applied. The KM and data analysis systems implemented by companies were analyzed, and the analysis was complemented by a review of the extant literature. Findings Four types of data-based decisions and a set of ground rules are identified toward enabling KM systems to handle big data and advanced analytics. Practical implications The paper proposes a practical framework that takes into account the diverse combinations of data-based decisions. Suggestions are provided about how KM systems can be reformed to facilitate the incorporation of big data and advanced analytics into organizations’ strategic decision-making. Originality/value This is the first typology of data-based decision-making considering advanced analytics.

No abstract

This article investigates the role of wisdom in management decision-making. In one of the first empirical studies investigating wisdom and management, 37 CEOs, top managers, and senior executives were interviewed about their perspectives on the concept of wisdom in the business context and its role in management decision-making; the data were analyzed using grounded theory methodology. The findings introduce a grounded construct of Wise Management Decision-making, in which wise decision-making is understood as an integrated cogni-emotional, reflective process that accounts for internal and external conditions related to the decision, which is made with the well-being of the greatest number of stakeholders in mind. The findings both confirm and challenge previous conceptual studies of wisdom and provide a practical approach to wise management decision-making. The implications of this study are significant as they broaden the view of the practicability of wisdom in management and add greater understanding of the complex nature of decision-making in the business context. For managers, developing wise decision-making abilities in situ should be considered an integrated and multidimensional practice, one that can be learned.

Novice researchers face challenges in applying grounded theory and choosing between its two historical approaches—Glaserian and Straussian. Although much has been discussed regarding the differences between the Glaserian and Straussian approaches, these differences can confuse early researchers, leading to the flawed use of grounded theory in management and organizational research. Using three case studies (a PhD graduate, a PhD candidate, and a PhD supervisor) in a management and organizational research context, this article illustrates these key differences and provides guidance for researchers in choosing between them. By providing examples and commentary, this article aims to help researchers to choose and apply the most appropriate form of grounded theory within the field of management and organizational research.