How reward, computer self-efficacy, and perceived power security affect knowledge management systems success: An empirical investigation in high-tech companies

2009 ◽  
Vol 60 (2) ◽  
pp. 332-347 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jung-Yu Lai
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Management ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Empirical Investigation ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
High Tech ◽  
Knowledge Management Systems ◽  
Computer Self Efficacy ◽  
Perceived Power

Measuring the use of knowledge management systems in supply firms

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 426-441 ◽  
Author(s):  
Piera Centobelli ◽  
Roberto Cerchione ◽  
Emilio Esposito
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Management ◽  
Knowledge Creation ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Service Industries ◽  
Field Analysis ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
High Tech ◽  
Knowledge Management Systems ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Use Of Knowledge

Purpose This paper aims to propose a taxonomic scheme of knowledge management systems (KMSs) and a set of technologies and managerial practices supporting supply firms in knowledge management processes. Design/methodology/approach Based on a field analysis involving a sample of suppliers operating in high-tech manufacturing and service industries, this paper investigates the use of KMSs in the sample investigated. Findings The paper shows that suppliers are generally reluctant to use updated and innovative KMSs replacing traditional ones. This gap confirms that suppliers have difficulties in facing rapid technological changes. The field analysis also points out that suppliers investigated perceive knowledge management mainly as an issue of knowledge transfer and knowledge storage while appear to be neglected the phase of knowledge creation. Originality/value Moreover, the paper highlights a misalignment between the intensity of use of knowledge management practices that support the phase of knowledge creation and knowledge management tools that should support such practices.

Social Influence and Knowledge Management Systems Use: Evidence from Panel Data

MIS Quarterly ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 299-313 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yinglei Wang ◽  
◽  
Darren B. Meister ◽  
Peter H. Gray ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Management ◽  
Panel Data ◽  
Social Influence ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
Knowledge Management Systems

Utilizing a systematic literature review to develop an integrated framework for information and knowledge management systems

2017 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 250-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chulatep Senivongse ◽  
Alex Bennet ◽  
Stefania Mariano
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Management ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Value Added ◽  
Specific Area ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
Knowledge Management Systems ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Integrated Framework ◽  
Information And Knowledge Management

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the value of using a systematic literature review to develop an integrated framework for information and knowledge management systems. Design/methodology/approach First, the systematic literature review method is introduced, differentiating it from traditional literature reviews in terms of value-added and limitations. Second, this methodology is used in a research application focused on absorptive capacity internal capabilities with regard to the processes of acquisition, assimilation, transformation and exploitation. Third, an integrated framework for information and knowledge management systems is developed from this application. Findings The systematic literature review approach provides a rigor that can assist in reducing researcher bias while simultaneously enabling the definition of a precise scope of review, with a clear explanation of selection criteria with the objective to find and review all the studies that are relevant to the search definitions. As a research method, it effectively supports a qualitative, quantitative or mixed methodology. Research limitations/implications This methodology was applied to one specific area of research. Specific limitations include the availability of articles in subscribed databases and the analytical capabilities of the tools used for text mining and analytics. Originality/value This paper demonstrates the usefulness of the systematic literature review methodology in developing an integrated framework for analysis.

Use of Knowledge Management Systems and the Impact on the Acquisition of Explicit Knowledge

2008 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 77-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Holli McCall ◽  
Vicky Arnold ◽  
Steve G. Sutton
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Management ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Knowledge Acquisition ◽  
Reference Materials ◽  
Explicit Knowledge ◽  
Experimental Methodology ◽  
Management Systems ◽  
Knowledge Management Systems ◽  
Use Of Knowledge ◽  
The Impact

ABSTRACT: In an era where knowledge is increasingly seen as an organization's most valuable asset, many firms have implemented knowledge-management systems (KMS) in an effort to capture, store, and disseminate knowledge across the firm. Concerns have been raised, however, about the potential dependency of users on KMS and the related potential for decreases in knowledge acquisition and expertise development (Cole 1998; Alavi and Leidner 2001b; O'Leary 2002a). The purpose of this study, which is exploratory in nature, is to investigate whether using KMS embedded with explicit knowledge impacts novice decision makers' judgment performance and knowledge acquisition differently than using traditional reference materials (e.g., manuals, textbooks) to research and solve a problem. An experimental methodology is used to study the relative performance and explicit knowledge acquisition of 188 participants partitioned into two groups using either a KMS or traditional reference materials in problem solving. The study finds that KMS users outperform users of traditional reference materials when they have access to their respective systems/materials, but the users of traditional reference materials outperform KMS users when respective systems/materials are removed. While all users improve interpretive problem solving and encoding of definitions and rules, there are significant differences in knowledge acquisition between the two groups.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document