A structured literature review of scientometric research of the knowledge management discipline: a 2021 update

Serenko, Alexander

doi:10.1108/jkm-09-2020-0730

Cited by 37 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 163 publications

(149 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The case study shows a healthy interest in the KM discipline, as is indicated by the growing IAKM membership and the number of scientific outcomes that this CoP has apparently made it possible to produce. This statement contrasts earlier reports noting a decline in the volume of yearly studies on KM topics since 2015 (Serenko, 2021). Therefore, it is confirmed that participating in a scientific CoP like IAKM can really be beneficial for members, because it can boost collective knowledge building and, by this way, scientific production even higher www.ejkm.com 102 ©ACPIL than the average of scholars in the same field.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 52%

Scientific Associations as Communities of Practice for Fostering Collaborative Knowledge Building: Case Study of IAKM

Handžić¹,

Brătianu²,

Bolisani³

2021

EJKM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knowledge building is a social process that is driven by the willingness of people to share their expertise and create new knowledge. Scientific Communities of Practice (CoPs) are communities of professors and researchers whose aim is to foster scientific knowledge generation. In the KM literature, research concerning this kind of CoPs has been substantially neglected so far. The present research analyses the case study of the International Association for Knowledge Management (IAKM) seen as a scientific CoP where members are mostly academics with research interests in developing and promoting knowledge management. Based on a collection of quantitative and qualitative data about member collaborations and scientific production, the study investigates the structure of interactions and the collaborative processes of IAKM members and the specific mechanisms of knowledge building within this CoP, seen as a paradigmatic example of scientific community. Members were asked to respond to a survey regarding their collaborative activities carried out with other IAKM members in the period of 2011 – 2020. The descriptive analysis revealed the kind of collaborations, the distribution of interactions across the community, and the dynamic patterns over time. A follow-up social network analysis was used to provide deeper insight into the community structure and dynamics. The research found that a CoP can really be useful for progress in a scientific field because it can provide a platform for trust and mutual acquaintance that reduces barriers to collaboration and knowledge building across different universities, professional roles, countries, and cultures, which is increasingly important for the progress of science. Most importantly, IAKM exhibited a cohesive and active core membership with pivotal roles played by a number of active members, which contributed significantly to the growth of the Association and, in general, to the advancements in the field of KM through collaborative knowledge building.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 52%

Scientific Associations as Communities of Practice for Fostering Collaborative Knowledge Building: Case Study of IAKM

Handžić¹,

Brătianu²,

Bolisani³

2021

EJKM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The increase in the scope of research works symbolizes the growing interest in the KM discipline and further confirms its status as a recognized management discipline. Moreover, as a discipline, KM is also recognized within the broader scientific community (Serenko, 2021).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…KM is considered a relatively young field (Serenko & Bontis, 2013). The deep historical roots of the discipline and the emergence of the first KM principles are described extensively in previous works (see, e.g., Serenko, 2021), and are not the focus of this article. It is a matter of historical record that KM has developed significantly since its establishment as a discipline in the late 1980s (Dalkir, 2005), and the literature records the evolution of KM over time (Handzic, 2017; Heisig, 2015).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

A holistic model of the role, development, and future of knowledge management: Proposal for exploratory research

Nakash

Baruchson‐Arbib

Bouhnik

2021

Knowl Process Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents our proposal for an exploratory research study. The objective of the research is to develop a conceptual framework of the interpretations, meanings, perceptions, and beliefs related to the role, development, and future of the knowledge management (KM) discipline. We propose to develop a holistic model that will depict professionals' perceptions of this issue: the combined perceptions of both KM consultants and knowledge managers. The proposed qualitative research will be based on three research tools: Semi‐structured in‐depth interviews, focus groups, and content analysis. The data will be analyzed using a thematic analysis method based on the grounded theory approach. We collected preliminary empirical evidence from international KM experts during 2020. The findings revealed a remarkable variety of issues that exist at the core of the KM discipline. These issues include the role and purpose of KM in knowledge‐intensive organizations, the implications of the existence or absence of KM, and views about future avenues for its development. Our intention is to explore these issues further by expanding the research to other KM professionals. Through this, we hope to assist in the positioning of the discipline in the age of knowledge. This research may contribute significantly to both the theoretical and practical aspects of KM. Its uniqueness is reflected in the voices of KM professionals. We foresee that our research will enable a better understanding of the evolution of KM as a discipline, its contemporary role, and its future possibilities.

show abstract

“…Another reason for the development of a dedicated ranking list of KM/IC journals pertains to the interdisciplinary nature of this domain (Serenko, 2013;Zavaraqi, 2016;Serenko, 2021). Interdisciplinary research refers to a "group of studies undertaken by scholars from two or more distinct scientific disciplines," which is "based upon a conceptual model that links or integrates theoretical frameworks from those disciplines, uses study design and methodology that is not limited to any one field, and requires the use of perspectives and skills of the involved disciplines throughout multiple phases of the research process" (Aboelela et al, 2007, p. 341).…”

Section: Introduction and Purpose Of The Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Global ranking of knowledge management and intellectual capital academic journals: a 2021 update

Serenko

Bontis

2021

JKM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this study is to update a global ranking list of 28 knowledge management and intellectual capital (KM/IC) academic journals. The list should be periodically updated because the pool of active KM/IC researchers changes, researchers adjust their journal perceptions, citation indices change and new journals appear while others become discontinued. Design/methodology/approach The ranking list was created based on a survey of 463 active KM/IC researchers and journal citation impact metrics (the h-index and the g-index). Findings Journal of Knowledge Management and Journal of Intellectual Capital are ranked A+, followed by The Learning Organization, Knowledge Management Research & Practice, VINE: The Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, Knowledge and Process Management and International Journal of Knowledge Management which are ranked A. VINE, Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management and Online Journal of Applied Knowledge Management have shown the most improvement. The recently established Journal of Innovation & Knowledge has demonstrated a strong performance. Practical implications KM/IC discipline stakeholders may consult and use the ranking list for various purposes, but they should do so with caution. Highly ranked journals are quite likely to have the Clarivate’s Journal Impact Factor or be included in the Clarivate’s Emerging Sources Citation Index. A journal’s longevity is strongly correlated with its citation metrics and is moderately correlated with expert survey scores. Interdisciplinarity is the natural state of the KM and IC research domains, and it should be embraced by the research community. Originality/value This study presents the most up-to-date ranking list of KM/IC academic journals.

show abstract

A structured literature review of scientometric research of the knowledge management discipline: a 2021 update

Cited by 37 publications

References 163 publications

Scientific Associations as Communities of Practice for Fostering Collaborative Knowledge Building: Case Study of IAKM

Scientific Associations as Communities of Practice for Fostering Collaborative Knowledge Building: Case Study of IAKM

A holistic model of the role, development, and future of knowledge management: Proposal for exploratory research

Global ranking of knowledge management and intellectual capital academic journals: a 2021 update

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About