PICMET 2006 Proceedings, 9-13 July, Istanbul, Turkey (c) 2006 PICMET

Knowledge Management Architecture: Building Blocks and Their Relationships

Varintorn Supyuenyong, Nazrul Islam

School of Management, Asian Institute of Technology, Pathumthani 12120, Thailand

Abstract--Although the concept of knowledge management
emerged in early 1960s, it has taken momentum in the recent
years. However the literatures in this area are scattered both in
academic and practicing arena. Some research focuses on
knowledge management with respect to the specific organization
type such as R&D organization. Others concentrate on
organization development and individual behavior in
implementing knowledge management.
This paper presents a holistic approach to knowledge
management by incorporating various models and propositions
within the knowledge discourse. The knowledge management
architecture consists of four elements namely: knowledge
components, knowledge management process, information
technology (IT), and organizational aspects. Knowledge
component includes knowledge definition and knowledge
categories, which has often been viewed differently by various
researchers. Knowledge management process, on the other
hand, contains the steps and activities to deal with knowledge
while information technology consists of ITs related support
infrastructure such as communication lines, networks, database,
and many others. Lastly, organizational aspects comprise the
organizational structure, corporate culture, and human
resource management. Among these four elements, knowledge
and knowledge management process are the key components of
the knowledge management concept. Taken together, this paper
also reveals the interrelatedness of all the elements as well as
their impact on the overall knowledge management in

architecture has been divided into four major elements as

shown in Fig. 1. These elements are: (i) knowledge
components, (ii) knowledge management process, (iii)
information technology (IT), and (iv) organization/corporate
culture. Section 2 of the paper presents the analysis of various
knowledge definitions and components given by different
researchers, and their classification based on different
perspectives. Section 3 presents the knowledge management
process that includes sub-processes and activities. Section 4
discusses information technology and its role in knowledge
management. The organizational aspects, such as the design
of organization structure, culture, and operational system for
carrying out knowledge management activities, are presented
in section 5. Finally section 6 presents the relationships of the
four elements vis a vis knowledge components, knowledge
management process, information technology, and
organization/corporate culture.

organizations.

I. INTRODUCTION

Although the concept of knowledge management

emerged in early 1960s [15], it has taken momentum in the
recent years. However, the literatures in this area are
scattered both in academic and practicing arena. For example,
Park and Kim [42] proposed a framework for designing and
implementing knowledge management system (KMS) for the
fourth generation R&D. Ahn and Chang [1], on the other
hand, developed the KP3 methodology to indirectly measure
knowledge by assessing the contribution of knowledge to
business performance. Some researchers studied the elements
of knowledge management. For example, Lee and Kim [28]
proposed four elements of knowledge management:
organizational knowledge, knowledge worker, knowledge
management process, and information technology (IT) while
Kim et al. [26] proposed knowledge, process, organizational
knowledge, and information technology (IT). Combining the
propositions and findings of different researchers together
will give us a clear picture of the knowledge management.
This paper investigates the different views and
perspectives given by various researchers and put them
together to give a holistic architecture of knowledge
management. In the process, the knowledge management

Fig. 1. Knowledge Management Architecture.

II. KNOWLEDGE COMPONENTS

The study of knowledge management needs a clear

understanding of knowledge components. Although
researchers have given different meanings to knowledge
according based on their own analysis, the categorization of
various definitions of knowledge (presented in Fig. 2)
enabled us to view it at the component level and in a more
structured way.
As seen from the figure, researchers identify knowledge
from two perspectives: theoretical and practical. Theoretical
perspective mainly deals with definitions and content aspects
particularly looking into the distinctive interpretations and
relations among data, information and knowledge; whereby,
knowledge is distinguished from information or data [26].
However, in practical perspective, researchers are more
interested in the nature of knowledge (or dimensional
aspects) and its operational domain aspects.

1210

PICMET 2006 Proceedings, 9-13 July, Istanbul, Turkey (c) 2006 PICMET

Data

Fig. 2. Knowledge definition classification.

A. Theoretical Perspective
1) Data: Researchers have defined data in terms of
linguistics, information, or new concepts. According to
CODASYL [11], "data are symbols inscribed by human
hands or by instruments." It perceives that data are only
symbols describing little about its source, and does not tell
about the elements, the usefulness or the exactly meaning of
it. Earl [16] and Alter [3] describe data as, "facts, images or
sounds that may or may not be pertinent or useful for a
particular task". Gandhi [17], however, had a quite distinct
description of data, as "those relatively devoid of context and
are the raw materials consist of observations, facts, or figures
from which information is obtained." These definitions give
us various perspectives of data. Gandhi's definition also
stressed the importance of data as the constituent element of
information; that is, when value is added to the data, it is
transformed into information.
2) Information: Although researchers have defined the
information in various ways, they can be seen from three

Viewpoint

Value added to data

Personnel perception

Fundamental of
knowledge

viewpoints: (i) value added to data, (ii) personnel perception,

and (iii) fundamental of knowledge (Table 1).
The value added viewpoint defines that when data are
managed by analyzing, interpreting, organizing, it will
become information. It seems that data are the inputs, and
information is the result of specific activities to generate the
meaning, and in the process value addition to data takes
place. Moreover, when data are transmitted at the appropriate
time and for a particular use it will becomes information.
From the personnel perception viewpoint, information is
the judgment by a person who uses data to solve problem or
to create new action. The value of information is not just
adding something to data but it was determined by the user
who recognizes that data are relevance to their specific
purpose for solving the problems and exploiting new
opportunities.
Fundamental of knowledge viewpoint looks beyond data
and emphasize the higher level, that is "knowledge".

TABLE 1. DEFINITION OF INFORMATION FROM DIFFERENT VIEWPOINTS

Information definition
Reference
Information is data whose form, content, and time of transmission/reception are
[3, 16]
appropriate for a particular use.
Data endowed with relevance and purpose, and accepting that the value of
[15]
information is determined by the receiver and not by the sender.
Information is a judgment, by an individual or groups, that given data resolve
[11]
questions, disclose or reveal distinctions, or enable new action.
Information, representing the fundamental basis of knowledge, might be directly
[38]
associated with the "facts" of the real world.

1211

PICMET 2006 Proceedings, 9-13 July, Istanbul, Turkey (c) 2006 PICMET

define the actual meaning of knowledge. The definition

within the output of information viewpoint sees knowledge as
information that can be made actionable in a way that adds
value to the enterprise. The organizational resources
viewpoint defines knowledge as a factor which affects the
organizational performance. Combination viewpoint defines
knowledge by combining two viewpoints: personal
perception and output of information [5, 17].

3) Knowledge: Definitions of knowledge in the existing

literature can be seen from four viewpoints: (i) Personal
perception, (ii) output of information, (iii) organizational
resources, and (iv) combination of personal perception and
output of information (Table 2).
Personal perception uses the opinion of individuals to
make judgment in defining knowledge, which is a subjective
approach because it is difficult to measure, capture, and
Viewpoint
Personal perception
Output of information

Organizational
resources
Combination of
personal perception
and output of
information

TABLE 2. DEFINITION OF KNOWLEDGE FROM DIFFERENT VIEWPOINTS

Knowledge definition
Knowledge is defined as a justified belief that increases an entity's capability for
effective action.
Knowledge is information made actionable in a way that adds value to the
enterprise.
Knowledge is the capacity for effective action in a domain of human actions.
Knowledge can be seen as the capacity, embodied in the brain of people and
embedded in social practices, to interpret information and, next, to transform
information into fresh knowledge.
Knowledge is an elusive and complex process that requires an individual to make
value judgments based on prior experiences and understanding of the patterns.
When information is analyzed to reveal unusual patterns or hidden trends,
processed, and placed in context, it is transformed into knowledge.
Knowledge is characterized by information, a capacity and an attitude

In the theoretical perspective it can be seen that data are

the observations of states, and fundamental of information
and knowledge. Information is data endowed with relevance
and purpose which used to exploit opportunities and solve
problems and is located in one or more entities. Knowledge is
the valuable information embedded in the brain or social
system that is used to achieve higher order organizational
strategies. However, there are some studies that views data,
information, and knowledge in the reverse hierarchy from the
above. According to them, knowledge is the fundamental of
information and data [8, 52]. In the KID model (knowledgeinformation-data), Braganza [8] argues that data are derived
from information and knowledge rather than information
being formed from data. He called it top-down approach.
Moreover, he suggests that knowledge and information
definition can be understood in terms of their purpose and
location.
B. Practical Perspective
Kamara et al. [25] argue that it is useless to define the

distinction between data, information, and knowledge

because the concept is too theoretical. From the practical
perspective, knowledge is viewed from (i) dimensional
aspects (nature of knowledge) and (ii) operational domain
aspects.
1) Dimensional aspects: Researchers of this viewpoint
emphasize that knowledge should be viewed from its nature that includes the dimensions such as characteristic (explicit
and tacit), location (individual and collective), source
(internal and external), etc. - that gives a practical insight
from the management point of view [7, 9, 18, 25, 26, 39, 57].

Reference
[22, 39]

[55]
[11]
[13]

[17]

[5]

Characteristic dimension of knowledge

Although the characteristic dimension divides knowledge
into tacit and explicit, researchers have defined these types of
knowledge in their own way as shown in Table 3 [1, 6, 19,
20, 22, 32, 39, 41, 44, 47].
Tacit knowledge mostly are implicit, mental models,
experiences of individuals, know-how, perceptions, difficult
to transfer, and subjective (highly personal, accumulated
through learning and experiences) which can be called
people-bound [5]. On the other hand, explicit knowledge
includes formal models, rules, procedures, more precisely and
formally, systematic, easy to codify, reuse, communicate,
share, and objective. It can be called system-bound [5].
However, organization has not the pure tacit and explicit but
a combination of both.
Some researchers have focused on the detail of tacit and
explicit knowledge to capture all elements for clear
understanding. Lundval and Johnson [34] adapted the nature
of knowledge from Polanyi [44] and divided tacit knowledge
into (i) know-how, consisting the practical capability to
execute specific activities and (ii) know-who, which involves
information about who knows what, who knows how.
Similarly, explicit knowledge also has been divided into (i)
know-what, which is the knowledge about facts close to what
is defined information, and easy to transfer and (ii) knowwhy, which refers to scientific knowledge of principles and
laws.
Location dimension of knowledge
This dimension differentiates knowledge in term of
location where the knowledge is residing. Spender [51]
defined two location of knowledge: individual and collective.
Individual knowledge is owned by each single person.

1212

PICMET 2006 Proceedings, 9-13 July, Istanbul, Turkey (c) 2006 PICMET

Polanyi [43] defined the levels of personal knowledge into

three: (i) skill acting according to rules, (ii) know-how skill plus acting in a social context, and (iii) expertise know-how plus the ability to influence rules and domain of
knowledge. Collective organizational knowledge includes
procedures, routines, strategies, etc. which are developed at a
corporate level and shared by the member of an organization
[7]. According to Joshi [24], individual knowledge is content
knowledge resource that includes knowledge held by the
peoples of the organization, by its computer-based
processors,
and by artifacts, whereas organizational
knowledge is schematic knowledge resource which includes
-

Perspective
Epistemology

Target

Place of existence
Content
Communication method

Source dimension of knowledge

This dimension differentiates knowledge in terms of its
source, which can be internal or external [18]. Organizational
knowledge can be created internally or acquired from
external sources. Spanoes and Lioukas [50] suggest that in
addition to internal knowledge and the firm-specific
capabilities, it is important to have an external knowledge
(industry level) which can contribute significantly to the
firm's performance.

TABLE 3. DEFINITION OF TACIT/EXPLICIT KNOWLEDGE

Tacit knowledge
Explicit knowledge
Tacit knowledge is knowledge that cannot be
Explicit knowledge is knowledge that is
transmittable in formal languages, mathematical
expressed externally.
equations, or symbols. It can be expresses in forms
of documents, manuals, computer codes, verbal
languages, etc.
Tacit knowledge is knowledge that is not
Explicit knowledge is more precisely and formally
expresses externally.
articulated, although removed from the original
Tacit knowledge is subconsciously understood
context of creation or use.
and applied, difficult to articulate, developed
from direct experience and action.
Tacit knowledge is another type which is highly
Explicit knowledge is a type of knowledge which
can be formed and expressed as data, scientific
personal and hard to formalize like subjective
insights, intuitions and hunches.
formulae, specifications, manuals and the like.
Architectural - knowledge about the ways in
Component - knowledge about each of the core
which the components are integrated and linked
design concepts and the way in which they are
together into a coherent whole.
implemented in a particular component.
Embodied, embedded
Embrained, encultured, encoded

Know-how, care-why
Tacit knowledge resides in the human mind,
behavior, and perception, and thus, it is difficult
to be formalized and communicated.
It is transferred through personal interaction,
mental models, technical skills, and experience.

Multi-dimensional considerations
Instead of using only one dimension of knowledge, many
researchers [1, 21, 26, 51] proposed the combination of
dimensions for classifying knowledge. Spender [51] proposed
2x2 matrix by combining characteristic dimension
(tacit/explicit) and location dimension (individual/collective
organization), as shown in Table 4. Four types of knowledge
are derived from this combinations which are: (i) conscious
knowledge - the conscious of employee, scientific and
technical training, (ii) automatic knowledge - employees'
skilled practices, automatic skills, hunches and intuitions, (iii)
objectified knowledge - science or established standards and
practices, and (iv) collective knowledge - the judgments
captured in the industry's recipe.
TABLE 4. 2X2 MATRIX OF ORGANIZATIONAL
KNOWLEDGE OF SPENDER [51 ]
Explicit
Tacit
Conscious
Automatic
Individual
Collective
organization

an organization's infrastructure, culture, strategies and

purpose.

knowledge

knowledge

knowledge

knowledge

Objectified

Collective

Know-what, know-why
Explicit knowledge is easily formalized and
expresses.
It can be facilitated by traditional information
processing technologies.

Reference
[44]

[22, 39]

[1]
[19]
[6]
[47]
[20, 32, 41]

Fig. 3 shows the different combinations using the three

dimensions (i.e., characteristic dimension, location
dimension, and source dimension) to cover different aspects
of knowledge in formulating the appropriate strategy.
Sourc

Location

Characteristic

Fig. 3. Knowledge Dimension Combination (Knowledge Cube).

2) Operational domain aspects: In this aspect, knowledge

is divided into different categories according to the
operational level of the organization. According to Kim et al.
[26] knowledge can be classified into two levels: (i) corporate

1213

PICMET 2006 Proceedings, 9-13 July, Istanbul, Turkey (c) 2006 PICMET

related knowledge: dealing with objective, policy and

strategies, and (ii) operation related knowledge: coping with
the detailed of business task or process and uses for decision
making and problem solving. For both levels, knowledge can
be of internal environment of organization such as policy,
strategy, culture, internal processes, and external environment
such as knowledge about markets, customer, competition,
technology trends or government policy.
The knowledge domains are viewed from different
perspectives depending on the organization type and the
context of research. Beijerse [5] presents three knowledge
domains for SMEs: (i) organization knowledge - dealing with
management in the organization such as policy, culture,
personnel, career planning, internal processes, cut backs,
alliances and teamwork, (ii) marketing knowledge knowledge about the external environment such as
competition, suppliers, customers, markets, target groups,
consumers, clients, users, interested parties, trade and
distribution and relation management, (iii) technological
knowledge - knowledge of products, research and

development, core competencies, technological development,

information and communication technology, product
development.
3) Knowledge Component Architecture: Fig. 4
schematically presents the architecture of knowledge
components which gives a comprehensive picture about the
component and their relationship in a hierarchical diagram.
The diagram demonstrates two main approaches of
knowledge definition classification. Theoretical perspective
shows the several viewpoints of definition among data,
information, and knowledge which occurred in the initial
period of knowledge management research. Now-a-days
researchers are interested in the practical perspective which
considers knowledge in dimensional aspects by looking from
the nature of knowledge and operational domain aspects by
looking from organization operational context. These various
dimensions (characteristic, location, and source dimension)
can also be analyzed as the attribute of operational
knowledge in all organizational level.

Data

di-vidlanl

TaI t

Kniwhow

Collective

envi

Etrl

Ironment

Knw

Knwwa

Ine_a

eniomn

Kno1w-why

Exera

environ- men

Fig. 4. Knowledge Definition Classification.

1214

PICMET 2006 Proceedings, 9-13 July, Istanbul, Turkey (c) 2006 PICMET

utilization. Table 5 captures the classification of knowledge

management process proposed by different researchers into
the above four sub-processes.

III. KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT PROCESS

Researchers have divided knowledge management
process into varying sub-processes. Nonaka and Takeuchi
[41] classified knowledge management process into three
main sub-processes: create, disseminate, and incorporate.
Ruggles [49] proposed three fundamental sub-processes:
generation, codification, and transfer. Tyndale [54] proposed
four sub-processes: creation, organization, distribution,
application. Wong and Aspinwall [58] suggested four
fundamental sub-processes: creating, organizing, sharing, and
using. Park and Kim [42] proposed five major sub-processes:
acquisition, organization, utilization, disposition, and sharing
with 15 activities.
Literatures reveal that knowledge management process
can be divided into four main sub-processes: (i) knowledge
creation and acquisition, (ii) knowledge organization and
retention, (iii) knowledge dissemination, and (iv) knowledge

A. Knowledge Creation andAcquisition

This sub-process includes knowledge capturing,
searching, gathering, and synthesis [4, 12, 23]. Before
creating or acquiring new knowledge, an enterprise should
identify organizational requirements by understanding their
tasks and the knowledge required for the same. After that, an
enterprise should find the knowledge gap between the
required knowledge and the existing knowledge and set up
the knowledge management strategy to create or acquire the
new knowledge from internal or external sources, in a tacit or
explicit format, and individual or collective organization
storage [27, 45].

TABLE 5. SUB-PROCESSES OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

Know-ledge
management subprocesses

Alavi
and
Leidner
[2]

Currie
[12]

Wong and

Aspinwall
[58]

Construction

Know-ledge
Creation
and
Acquisi-tion

Knowledge management processes from different researchers

Nonaka
and
Takechi

Tyndale

Demarest
[14]

[54]

[41]

Ruggles
[49]

Lim and

Klobas
[33]

Lee et al.

[29]

Jackson

[23]

Angus et
al. [4]

Wensley
[56]

Gathering

Generation
Creation
Acquisition

Capture
Embodiment
Knowledge
Organization and
Retention

Refiniii

Codifiction

Accuuaion

Storage

Transfer

Know-ledge
Dissemination

Transmission

Sharing

Disseminate
Distribution
Communicatio

X
x

x
x

x
x

Know-ledge
Utilization

Utilizion

Appicon

B. Knowledge Organization and Retention

When an enterprise acquires new knowledge whether
from internal or external sources, it is necessary to examine
whether that knowledge is valid or consistence with the
organizational needs. Tacit knowledge that held by a
knowledge worker needs to codify, to the extent possible, to
be explicit knowledge that makes knowledge communicable
and can be shared within the organization [36]. Furthermore,
knowledge needs to be categorized by filtering and indexing,
and keeps in the organizational storage or knowledge
repositories. These knowledge repositories should be built,
maintained, and used effectively for cost reduction and
quality improvement [33]. The retrieval process also includes
in this step and should be designed for easy accessing. When
the knowledge is organized in proper and systematic format,
it will be easy to keep for reusing. Nowadays, many
organizations use ITs for this propose.

C. Knowledge Dissemination
An enterprise will be a good learning organization when
knowledge is rapidly disseminated within the organization.
Knowledge transfer can be both horizontal knowledge
transfer which shares knowledge among employee in the
organization, and vertical knowledge transfer that transfers
between company's partners such as suppliers, customers, or
collaboration institutes. The way to support knowledge
dissemination is a combination of incentives and co-operative
forms of behavior within the culture of the organization [37].
IT-based communication helps the process of dissemination
to a great extent.

D. Knowledge Utilization
The knowledge utilization is sometimes called by some
researchers as application, production or using. This sub-

1215

PICMET 2006 Proceedings, 9-13 July, Istanbul, Turkey (c) 2006 PICMET

process is to generate value from the knowledge [14], or to

make knowledge work such as to incorporate the knowledge
into the organization's products and services [58]. It includes
the adaptation of the best practice from other leading
organizations, uncover relevant knowledge, and apply it [29].

IV. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

Information technology (IT) is one of the key enabler for
knowledge management practices. The evolution of
knowledge management tools starts from the traditional
method with simple and offline system such as paper
documents, libraries, or face-to-face meeting to IT-based
tools which are key drivers and are more powerful as a
knowledge repository and a communication system [17, 26,
28, 35]. One of the most important facilitator of knowledge
management process is knowledge management system
(KMS) [26]. Alavi and Leidner [2] define KMS as an "ITbased system developed to support the organization
knowledge management behavior". Quaddus and Xu [46]
gave extended perspective of knowledge management system
(KMS) by defining KMS as "a specialized information
system (IS) which deals with the generation, preservation and
sharing of knowledge within and outside of the organization".
The classification of information technology (IT) tools
mostly depends on their functionality. Some researchers
grouped them from a broader viewpoint by using the key
function while some extended into detail by looking the
technology type. Liao [31] classified knowledge management
technologies and applications into seven categories: (i)
knowledge management framework, (ii) knowledge-based
system (KBS), (iii) data mining (DM), (iv) information and
communication technology (ICT), (v) artificial intelligence
(Al)/expert system (ES), (vi) database technology (DT), and
(vii) modeling. Tyndal [54] studied two types of IT-based
tools for knowledge management: (i) information technology

tools developed in other area such as accounting, human

resource, etc., and added some functionality to extend their
ability, and (ii) IT-based tools that originally developed for
knowledge management area. He divided knowledge
management tools into six categories. Under these categories,
they focused 17 technology types that are frequently used for
knowledge management. However, Rao [48] divided
knowledge management tools into 11 key sets and presented
the relationship between information technology (IT) tools
and other aspects such as knowledge dimensions and
implications for information technology (IT) tools,
information technology (IT) tools for knowledge
management processes, or information technology (IT) tools
in the knowledge spiral model of Nonaka and Nishiguchi
[40].
Information technology (IT) tools can be grouped
corresponding to the knowledge management process (Table
6) for designing or selecting appropriate and effective
information technology (IT) tools in managing the
knowledge. Knowledge management processes show the
functionally requirement and information technology (IT)
tools serve as a facilitator or supporter for that function.
Some information technology (IT) tools are used for several
knowledge management processes while some are used only
on one knowledge management process.
For effective and efficient knowledge management, it is
necessary to incorporate various types of technology [54].
With this in mind, the new technology for knowledge
management should be developed in a way that it is able to
perform various functions within one system with respect to
other technologies. It should not work only by itself as in the
past. However, it is up to the company (with its resources
and capabilities) to select the sort of technology that can
facilitate or support knowledge management in the
organization more effectively.

TAB LE 6. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY TOOLS FOR KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

Liao 1311
Tyndal 1541

Knowledge Management

Processes

Knowledge Creation and

Acquisition

Information and communication

technology (ICT)

Searching and indexing systems

Communications and
collaboration systems

Knowledge Organization and

Knowledge-based

Document

Retention

Knowledge Dissemination

Knowledge Utilization

Rao [48]

E-learning
Innovation and idea management
systems
Social network analysis and

design
system (KBS)

management systems

Data mining (DM)

Information and communication
technology (ICT)
Database technology (DT)

Information management systems

Searching and indexing systems
Intellectual asset systems

Information and

Information management systems

communication

technology (ICT)

Information and communication

technology (ICT)
Artificial intelligence (Al)/expert
system (ES)

Communications and
collaboration systems

Information management systems

Expert systems
Communications and
collaboration systems

Modeling

1216

Knowledge taxonomies

Online communities of practice

Content management

Groupware

Enterprise portals

Wireless tools for knowledge

mobilization
Tools for extending KM across
organizational boundaries

Online communities of practice

PICMET 2006 Proceedings, 9-13 July, Istanbul, Turkey (c) 2006 PICMET

V. ORGANIZATION/CORPORATE CULTURE

Organizational structure, culture, practices, etc. have an

important bearing in knowledge management in an enterprise
[26]. Some rely on structured [5], some on unstructured [17],
and some on combination of both for managing knowledge
within the organization. Many organizations do not rely on
formal procedures, process models and information
technology system in managing knowledge but they rely on
social interaction [30].
The corporate culture that allows employees to be able to
share their ideas, experiences, and viewpoints is one of the
most important enabler of knowledge management [17]. It
also encourages collaboration, trust, knowledge sharing,
listening, learning and creativity. In his view, top
management commitment is one of the success factors in
knowledge management.
Several approaches are used for specific knowledge
management process, such as training programs or research
and development (R&D) activities in order to generate new
knowledge. Other approaches like openness, flexibility and a
risk-taking propensity of the company are also important for
knowledge sharing and utilization [5]. The relative amount
used for these approaches depends on the organizational
resources and capabilities. Furthermore, the presence of a
knowledge management team within the organization is
another approach for facilitating the process of knowledge
management [26].
VI. THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE FOUR ELEMENTS
WITHIN THE KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT
ARCHITECTURE

Fig. 5 illustrates the relationship between constituent

elements (knowledge and knowledge management process)
and enabler elements (information technology (IT) and
organization/corporate culture). They include: (i) knowledge
and knowledge management process, (ii) knowledge and
information technology (IT), (iii) knowledge and
organization/corporate culture, (iv) knowledge management
process and information technology (IT), and (v) knowledge
management process and organization/corporate culture.
.0

+ p.
*

. . . . .

1#

*-;

......

!,..
Fl.*

+1

Fig. 5. The relationship of knowledge management components.

A. Knowledge and Knowledge Management Process

The relationship between knowledge and knowledge
management process was observed in various perspectives.
Gandhi [17] proposes different activities for managing
different types of knowledge within an organization. First of
all, he suggested that in the context of explicit knowledge
management, organizations must generate, create, or acquire
knowledge. Secondly, knowledge should be codified and
organized to make it more accessible. He also proposed the
retrieval and transfer of knowledge through communication
or publications. Lastly, organizations should encourage their
employees to use and apply knowledge in solving problems,
support decisions, improve performance, coach, and analyze
situations and processes to maintain business activities. For
tacit knowledge management, he suggested two ways: (i) the
formal way, wherein knowledge is converted to explicit
knowledge through written communications, interviews, and
oral history, and (ii) using the informal way -through the
creation of communities ofpractice within organizations that
facilitate the transfer of tacit knowledge through face-to-face
interaction, verbal communication and dialogue, hands-on
instruction, interactive problem solving, networking,
coaching, mentoring, and professional development activities.
B. Knowledge and Information Technology (IT)

Several researchers have observed that information

technology creates knowledge in the organization while
others perceive information technology as tools that facilitate
the knowledge management process. Lee and Kim [28]
suggested that information technology relates to knowledge
through knowledge repository system by creating knowledge
maps, expert maps and search engines for easy accessing and
helping to reuse that knowledge. But Gandhi [17] argues that
information technology is used only as a supporting tool for
knowledge management process, and does not in itself
provide knowledge like what other authors have claimed.
However, information technology can help people locate
necessary information, but people need to determine whether
that information is appropriate and relevant to their needs in
order to transform into knowledge.
C. Knowledge and Organization/Corporate Culture
A conducive and supporting environment in an enterprise
such as a learning organization helps to create and retain
employee knowledge. Lee and Kim [28] illustrate the
relationship between the knowledge worker and
organizational knowledge. An executive approach to this
relationship is giving employees appropriate education or
training to generate knowledge. Moreover, organization
should have performance measurement and incentive system
that motivates the employees to learn new things, acquire
new knowledge, and encourages them to share their own
knowledge. For the human resource management,
organization should set up a learning program or a career path
program to foster employees' knowledge capabilities and also
improve the quality of staff.

1217

PICMET 2006 Proceedings, 9-13 July, Istanbul, Turkey (c) 2006 PICMET

Since this paper tries to look into the detail of each

element both in the macro and micro levels and their
interrelatedness, the information revealed here in the paper
will help managers identify exactly the type of knowledge
necessary for their organizations, the specific processes that
can be used to manage them and how to design and select the
appropriate supporting environment, organization culture and
information technology (IT), for managing knowledge in
their organizations.

D. Knowledge Management Process and Information

Technology (IT)
Information technology (IT) plays a supporting role in
every knowledge management process both in the knowledge
management implementation project and in the daily
knowledge management activities. For example, data mining
is one of supporting tool that mainly helps in generating
knowledge [52]. Internet and intranet are the communication
systems [10] help in transmission, and acquisition knowledge

within and outside organization.

E.
Knowledge
Management
Process
and
Organization/Corporate Culture
Corporate culture plays an important role in knowledge
generation, organization, sharing and application. Human
resource management planning and an appropriate
organizational culture and structure setting support
knowledge management in creating a collaborative climate.
The study done by Sveiby and Simons [53] shows that a
collaborative climate consisting of organizational culture,
immediate supervisor, employee attitude, and work group
support, is also a key factor in knowledge creation and
knowledge transfer process.
Lee and Kim [28] propose a model for organizational
knowledge management showing that the core managerial
factors that influence knowledge worker are leadership,
empowerment, performance measurement and incentive,
organization structure and culture. Organizations can support
knowledge and its process by setting up procedures or rules,
reshaping the structure, creating the open culture, or
developing a training program to improve the organization's
human resource.
VII. CONCLUSION

There are varieties of research found in the knowledge

management arena. This paper presents an extensive
literature relevant to knowledge management and its
architecture in a holistic approach. A proper knowledge
management must have an in-depth understanding of its two
fundamental elements: knowledge component and knowledge
management process, as well as its two enabler elements:
information technology (IT) and organization/corporate
culture. Knowledge is defined in various ways depending on
the researchers' interest and perception. Moreover,
researchers tend to define knowledge in a more pragmatic
approach than using the theoretical means because they take
an interest on how to use it rather than what is it. Knowledge
management process is use differently by various researchers
because they would like to cover all activities in managing
different knowledge types within distinct organizational types
but conveying similar meanings. Two enabler elements are
commonly studied as tools and methods that support
knowledge management. However, the number of researchers
done on limited since it is difficult to find a model that can be
used by these elements on every organization.

REFERENCES
[1] Ahn, J.H. and S.G. Chang,; "Assessing the contribution of knowledge
to business performance: the KP3 methodology," Decision
Support Systems, vol. 36 (4), pp. 403-416, 2004.
[2] Alavi, M. and D.E. Leidner,; "Review: knowledge management and
knowledge management systems: conceptual foundations and research
issues," MIS Quarterly, vol. 25 (1), pp. 107-136, 2001.
[3] Alter, S.; Information Systems, A management perspective. Menlo
Park, CA: Benjamin-Cummings Publishing Company, 1996.
[4] Angus, J., J. Patel, J. Harty; Knowledge management: Great concept...
but what is it?, Information Week, March 1998.
[5] Beijerse, R.P.; "Knowledge management in small and medium-sized
companies: knowledge management for entrepreneurs," Journal of
Knowledge Management, vol. 4, pp. 162-179, 2000.
[6] Blackler, F.; "Knowledge, knowledge work and organizations,"
Organization Studies, vol. 16, pp. 1021-1046, 1995.
[7] Bolisani, E. and E. Scarso; "Information technology management: a
knowledge-based perspective," Technovation, vol. 19, pp. 209-217,
1999.
[8] Braganza, A.; "Rethinking the data-information-knowledge hierarchy:
towards a case-based model," International Journal of Information
Management, vol. 24, pp. 347-356, 2004.
[9] Chang, S.G. and J.H. Ahn; "Product and process knowledge in the
performance-oriented knowledge management approach," Journal of
Knowledge Management, vol. 9, pp. 114-132, 2005.
[10] Choi, B. and H. Lee; "An empirical investigation of KM styles and
their effect on corporate performance," Information & Management,
vol. 40, pp. 403-417, 2003.
[11] CODASYL, Feature Analysis of Generalized Data Base Management
Systems, ACM, May 1971.
[12] Currie, W. L.; "A knowledge-based risk assessment framework for
evaluating web-enabled application outsourcing projects,"
International Journal of Project Management, vol. 21, pp. 207-217,
2003.
[13] Davenport, T.H. and L. Prusak; Working knowledge: how
organizations manage what they know. Boston , Harvard Business
School Press, 1998.
[14] Demarest, M.; "Understanding Knowledge Management," Long Range
Planning, vol. 30, pp. 374-384, 1997.
[15] Drucker, P.; The age of discontinuity: guidelines for our changing
society. New York: Harper & Row, 1969.
[16] Earl, M.J., "Knowledge as strategy: reflections on Skandia International
and Shorko Films," in Strategic Information Systems: A European
Perspectiv, eds.: C. Ciborra, T. Jelassi, New York: Wiley, pp. 53-69,
1994.
[17] Gandhi, S.; "Knowledge Management and Reference Services," The
Journal ofAcademic Librarianship, vol. 30, pp. 368-381, 2004.
[18] Hall, R. and P. Andriani, "Managing Knowledge for Innovation," Long
Range Planning, vol. 35, pp. 29-48, 2002.
[19] Henderson, R.M. and K.B. Clark; "Architectural innovation: The
reconfiguration of exiting product technologies and the failure of
established firms," Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 35, pp. 9-30,
1990.
[20] Hippel, E.; "Sticky information and the locus of problem solving:
Implications for innovation," Management Science, vol. 40, pp. 429439, 1994.

1218

PICMET 2006 Proceedings, 9-13 July, Istanbul, Turkey (c) 2006 PICMET

[21] Hitt, M.A., R.D. Ireland and H.K. Lee; "Technological learning,
knowledge management, firm growth and performance: an introductory
essay," Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, vol. 17,
pp. 23 1-246, 2000.
[22] Huber, G.; "Organization learning: the contribution processes and the
literatures," Organization Science, vol. 2, pp. 88-115, 1991.
[23] Jackson, C.; "Process to product-Creating tools for knowledge
management," Conference in Lisbon, Portugal, 1999.
[24] Joshi, K., "An investigation of knowledge management characteristics:
synthesis, delphi study, analysis," in Dissertation: M. Carol, Lexington,
KY: Gatton College of Business and Economics, University of
Kentucky, 1998.
[25] Kamara, J.M., C.J. Anumba and P.M. Carillo; "A CLEVER approach
to selecting a knowledge management strategy," International Journal
Project Management, vol. 20, pp. 205-211, 2002.
[26] Kim, Y.G., S.H. Yu and J.H. Lee; "Knowledge strategy planning:
methodology and case," Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 24, pp.
295-307, 2003.
[27] Kucza, T., "Knowledge Management Process Model", Retrieved
World
Wide
11/25/05
Web,
http://www.vtt.fi/infpdf/publications/2001 /P455.pdf
[28] Lee, J.H. and Y.G. Kim; "A stage model of organizational knowledge
management: a latent content analysis," Expert Systems with
Applications, vol. 20, pp. 299-311, 2001.
[29] Lee, K.C., S. Lee and I.W. Kang; "KMPI: measuring knowledge
management performance," Information & Management, vol. 42, pp.
469-482, 2005.
[30] Leseure, M.J. and N.J. Brookes; "Knowledge management benchmarks
for project management," Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 8,
pp. 103-116, 2004.
[31] Liao, S.H.; "Knowledge management technologies and applicationsliterature review from 1995 to 2002," Expert Systems with
Applications, vol. 25, pp. 155-164, 2003.
[32] Liebowitz, J. and L.C. Wilcox; Knowledge management and its
integrative elements, Boca Raton: CRC Press, 1997.
[33] Lim, D. and J. Klobas; "Knowledge management in small enterprises,"
The Electronic Library, vol. 18, pp. 420-432, 2000.
[34] Lundvall, B.A. and B. Johnson; "The learning economy," Journal of
Industry Studies, vol. 1, pp. 23-42, 1994.
[35] McCampbell, A.S., L.M. Clare and S.H. Gitters; "Knowledge
management: the new challenge for the 21st century," Journal of
Knowledge Management, vol. 3, pp. 172-179, 1999.
[36] Millar, J., A. Demaid and P. Quintas; "Trans-organizational innovation:
a framework for research," Technology Analysis & Strategic
Management, vol. 9, pp. 399-418, 1997.
[37] Morris, T. and L. Empson; "Organisation and expertise: An exploration
of knowledge bases and the management of accounting and consulting
firms," Accounting, Organizations and Society, vol. 23, pp. 609-624,
1998.
[38] Nightingale, P.; A Cognitive Model of Innovation. Research Policy,
forthcoming, 1998.

[39] Nonaka, I.; "A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation,"

Organization Science, vol. 5, pp. 14-37, 1994.
[40] Nonaka, I. and T. Nishiguchi, Knowledge Emergence: Social,
Technical, and Evolutionary Dimensions of Knowledge Creation.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 200 1.
[41] Nonaka, I. and H. Takeuchi; The Knowledge-creating Company. New
York: Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1995.
[42] Park, Y. and S. Kim; "Knowledge management system for fourth
generation," Technovation, pp. 1-8, Available online 19 November
2004.
[43] Polanyi, M.; Personal Knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1962.
[44] Polanyi, M.; The tacit dimension. New York: Doubleday and Company
Inc, 1967.
[45] Probst, G., S. Raub and K. Romhardt; Managing Knowledge: Building
Blocksfor Success. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2000.
[46] Quaddus, M. and Q. Xu; "Adoption and diffusion of knowledge
management systems: field studies of factors and variables,"
Knowledge-Based Systems, vol. 19, pp. 107-115, 2005.
[47] Quinn, J.B., P. Anderson and S. Finkelstein; "Leveraging intellect,"
Academy of Management Executive, vol. 10, pp. 7-27, 1996.
[48] Rao, M.; Knowledge Management Tools and Techniques: Practitioners
and Expert Evaluate KM Solutions. Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann,
2005.
[49] Ruggles, R.; Knowledge management tools. Oxford: ButterworthHeinemann, 1997.
[50] Spanos, Y.E. and S. Lioukas; "An examination into the causal logic of
rent generation: Contrasting porter's competitive strategy framework
and the resource-based perspective," Strategic Management Journal,
vol. 22, pp. 907-934, 2001.
[51] Spender, J.C.; "Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the
firm," Strategic Management Journal, vol. 17, pp. 45-62, 1996.
[52] Spiegler, I.; "Technology and knowledge: bridging a 'generating' gap,"
Information & Management, vol. 40, pp. 533-539, 2003.
[53] Sveiby, K.E. and R. Simons; "Collaborative climate and effectiveness
of knowledge work - an empirical study," Journal of Knowledge
Management, vol. 6, pp. 420-433, 2002.
[54] Tyndale, P.; "A taxonomy of knowledge management software tools:
origins and applications," Evaluation and Program Planning, vol. 25,
pp. 183-190, 2002.
[55] Vail, E.F.; "Knowledge mapping: getting started with knowledge
management," Information Systems Management, vol. 40, pp. 16-23,
1999.
[56] Wensley, A., "Tools for knowledge management," Coventry:
University of Warwick, BPRC Conference on Knowledge Management:
Concepts and Controversies, conference paper, February 10-1 1, 2000.
[57] Wiig, K.M., R. Hoog, and R. Spek; "Supporting knowledge
management: A selection of methods and techniques," Expert Systems
with Applications, vol. 13, pp. 125-145, 1997.
[58] Wong, K.Y. and E. Aspinwall; "Characterizing knowledge
management in the small business environment," Journal of
Knowledge Management, vol. 8, pp. 44-61, 2004.

1219