Knowledge management approaches of small and medium-sized firms: a cluster analysis

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to categorise the approaches to knowledge management (KM) by companies. In the literature, there is no consensus on a universal or “best” approach to KM. Especially, this paper singles out and discusses the variegated features that characterise the implementation of KM by small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) having different characteristics. Design/methodology/approach A cluster analysis was used to detect the possible distinct traits of companies that have different approaches to KM. The unit of analysis is represented by small- and medium-sized knowledge intensive business services (KIBS) firms. Data were collected by means of an extensive survey of 223 companies in different European countries and sectors. Findings Three clusters were identified: Companies showing a relative “unconscious” attention to KM and implementing KM practices without particular awareness; Companies adopting a more conscious approach and using a significant number of KM practices; and companies with a marginal propensity towards KM. Research limitations/implications This study considers only KIBS, and future research should include other economic sectors. In addition, a convenience sample was used. Practical implications This paper improves awareness of managers of small companies concerning different KM approaches that can be adopted. It highlights that a conscious adoption of a KM strategy involves the introduction of a set of consistent practices. Originality/value The topic of KM approaches by small companies is still underdeveloped in the literature. Also, the paper proposes a multi-contextual investigation that makes it possible to highlight the transversality of KM approaches across different countries or sectors.

Capacities, competences and capabilities as knowledge structures to build relational capital

“…The literature emphasises the importance of relational capital for all kinds of organisations, including higher educational institutions (Secundo et al , 2010). This knowledge, created by external stakeholders interacting with internal stakeholders (Jordão et al , 2019), is crucial to the success and survival of any organisation, as it provides competitive advantages (Charband and Navimipour, 2018; Alexandru et al , 2019). Indeed, universities are increasingly being asked to demonstrate the benefit they provide in the knowledge economy to their students, their most important stakeholders (Ali et al , 2014).…”

Knowledge Ambidexterity within a Business Context: Taking Stock and Moving Forward

“…However, the extension of the current organisational learning, knowledge management [72] and innovation research that analyses the ambidexterity challenge faced by organizations regarding their KM processes and strategies, is a topic that still remains in an evolutionary phase. Within this general context, this paper adds value not only by describing the patterns and trends in the knowledge ambidexterity literature with the purpose of examining the main dimensions, antecedents, and consequences of knowledge ambidexterity, but also by identifying potential areas for future research that may help to advance the consolidation of the field.…”

Knowledge management stocks in Serbian small and mid-sized enterprises

“…Tien and colleagues (2019) pointed to the importance of KM for the competitive advantage of Vietnam SMEs, which are often weak and lacking in this important resource. In the cluster analysis conducted on 223 companies in different European countries and sectors, three clusters were identified: 1. companies that unconsciously implemented KM, 2. companies that more consciously introduced KM practices and 3. companies with a marginal propensity towards KM (Alexandru et al, 2019). On a sample of 217 workers in small and medium enterprises in Iraq, Abdulaali and colleagues (2019) proved that there was a positive relationship between intellectual capital and the success of small and medium enterprises.…”