term paper on knowledge management

• Reference Manager
• Simple TEXT file

People also looked at

Original research article, influence of knowledge management practices on entrepreneurial and organizational performance: a mediated-moderation model.

• 1 School of Management, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, China
• 2 Lyallpur Business School, Government College University Faisalabad, Faisalabad, Pakistan
• 3 Government College Women University, Faisalabad, Pakistan
• 4 Ghazi University, Dera Ghazi Khan, Pakistan

This study aims to identify the influence of knowledge management practices on the entrepreneurial and organizational performance with the mediating effect of dynamic capabilities and moderating role of opportunity recognition. Data were gathered from 486 entrepreneurs and applied a structural equation model to test the hypotheses. We found that knowledge management practices have a positive and significant influence on dynamic capabilities, as well as have a significant impact on entrepreneurial and organizational performance. Moreover, results indicated that dynamic capabilities partially mediate in the relationship between knowledge management practices on entrepreneurial and organizational performance. Furthermore, the relationship between knowledge management practices with entrepreneurial and organizational performance strengthening by opportunity recognition. Further, implications and limitations were discussed in the paper.

Introduction

With the rapid development in the knowledge-based economy, knowledge is considered an important measure to create prosperity and success ( Abubakar et al., 2019 ). Knowledge is the best driving force for entrepreneurial and organizational performance and its success ( Zaim et al., 2019 ). According to Wahda (2017) knowledge is the essential element of an organization for achieving a competitive advantage and maximum outcome. Knowledge management is defined as the explicit and effective management of important knowledge and its related practices of identification and its exploitation ( Ngah et al., 2016 ). Effective knowledge resources make up knowledge capability among organizations with the help of knowledge sharing, knowledge creation, innovativeness, and knowledge absorption. Therefore, when these resources merged it determine the knowledge management practices which ultimately turn into the relationship with organizational performance ( Alaarj et al., 2016 ).

Meanwhile, Butt et al. (2019) argue that organizations effort to look for means that support the workforce of knowledge resources to accomplish with the organization’s challenges in a competitive market as well as enhanced the entrepreneurial and organizational performance. Prior researchers indicate that knowledge management practices have progressively become an interest of topic in all areas of business studies and provide a significant role in the entrepreneurial and organizational success because of its growing awareness in the society ( Tang, 2017 ). Therefore, Antunes and Pinheiro (2020) suggested that knowledge management practices would help in the development of small and medium enterprises (SME’s) and their activities so they become more strong and effective to stay longer. Looking into previous literature researchers examined the role of knowledge management practices on organizational performance and found that knowledge management positively related to organizational and business performance ( Cerchione and Esposito, 2016 ; Serrat, 2017 ; Abuaddous et al., 2018 ).

Moreover, knowledge-based theory (KBT) explains that when knowledge management practices are effectively and efficiently managed, it develops unique capabilities that contribute to enhanced organizational performance by innovation ( Kane, 2017 ). Therefore, organizations with superior knowledge management practices are likely to achieve organizational performance ( Lopes et al., 2017 ; Shujahat et al., 2019 ). Akhavan et al. (2016) state that knowledge management practices such as knowledge sharing, knowledge acquisition, and knowledge application contributes to innovation which helps to improve organizational performance.

Furthermore, Byukusenge and Munene (2017) explain that knowledge sharing is an activity through knowledge skills, information is exchanged among people, peers, friends, or with in the organizations. Moreover, Centobelli et al. (2019) specified that innovative capacity refers to the innovation that involves the transformation of an effect into a reality that develops a new product and service that meets the needs and demands of the customers in the organizations. Researchers Santoro et al. (2018) explained that capacity as the organization’s ability to value, integrate, and apply new knowledge for improving the organizational performance. However, the relationship between knowledge sharing, innovative capacity, and absorptive capacity and organizational performance has been examined in the prior literature in the context of Western culture ( Lopes et al., 2017 ).

Furthermore, existing studies suggested that dynamic capability playing a vital role in achieving organizational and business firm performance through sensing, knowledge sharing, and reconfiguring ( Mardani et al., 2018 ; Antunes and Pinheiro, 2020 ). Prior researchers confirmed that dynamic capability had a direct and indirect positive influence on firm performance ( Lin and Wu, 2014 ). Numerous researchers found that dynamic capability had a positive effect on organizational performance ( Hung et al., 2010 ). Each of these studies examined the dynamic capability as a predictor variable to measure business and organizational performance and the relationship between knowledge management practices and its impact on organizational and entrepreneurial performance is under-explored. Therefore, it is necessary to identify the direct effect of knowledge management practices and the indirect effect of dynamic capability on entrepreneurial and organizational performance.

The gap of the study consists of four perspectives. Firstly, this study covers the existing gap in the literature of knowledge management practices such as knowledge sharing, innovative capacity, and absorptive capacity on organizational and entrepreneurial performance, because no empirical study is so far available on this relationship. Secondly, this study measures the performance of SME entrepreneurs using dynamic capability as a mediator because the significance of the SME sector is increasing gradually. Thirdly, most of the previous studies focused on the other sectors as well as examined the role of knowledge management practices on business performance ( Hung et al., 2010 ; Protogerou et al., 2012 ; Gholami et al., 2013 ) and taken innovation as a mediator variable in the relationship between organizational performance and other factors such as organizational learning, entrepreneurial orientation ( Hartono and Halim, 2014 ; Ferreira et al., 2020a ). Therefore, the relationship between knowledge management practices using dynamic capability as a mediator on entrepreneurial and organizational performance of SMEs is the motivation of this study. Fourthly, the direct relationship of dynamic capability on organizational and entrepreneurial performance is defined in the literature ( Ambrosini and Bowman, 2009 ). It is seen in the previous researches the relationship between opportunity recognition and dynamic capability on entrepreneurial and organizational performance is neglected by the researchers because opportunity recognition realizes an idea, capability that matches well with a particular target market to improve business performance. Thus, this study takes opportunity recognition as a moderating variable in the relationship between dynamic capabilities, entrepreneurial and organizational performance.

Literature Review and Hypotheses Development

Knowledge management.

Researchers believe that firms can stand out in one or more value-added disciplines; it can achieve unique competitive advantages and excellent organizational performance ( Torabi and El-Den, 2017 ). Knowledge management is likely to be a value-added method, more actively using knowledge and expertise to create value and improve organizational efficiency ( Rašula et al., 2012 ). Organizations with a higher level of knowledge management capabilities are more likely to increase the competitiveness of an entrepreneur by collecting, organizing, and transforming knowledge to implement ( Shujahat et al., 2019 ). Therefore, knowledge management practices play an important role not only in the firm’s performance but also lead to entrepreneurial performance. The process of knowledge management operation in an organization is complex and the entrepreneurs are managing, respectively. Thus, this study focuses on the key practices which the organizations acquire and use to improve their knowledge.

Relationship Between Knowledge Sharing Capacity, Dynamic Capability, Entrepreneurial and Organizational Performance

In the current era of a knowledge-based economy, knowledge plays an important role in driving the value of an organization. Individuals with valued knowledge help to achieve and extend the organizational performance that ultimately contributes to the sustainability of the organizations ( Ha and Lo, 2018 ). Therefore, organizations with a lack of knowledge sharing capacities not performed well in competitive markets. Prior researches stated that entrepreneurs participated in the development and sharing of valuable knowledge, that can not only improve entrepreneurial performance as well as enhance the organizational performance ( Ohemeng and Kamga, 2020 ). Knowledge sharing capacity assists in problem-solving, adopting new technology, creating an invention, and enhancing the dynamic capabilities of an organization ( Ali et al., 2019 ).

The knowledge-sharing capacity of an entrepreneur develops the dynamic capability for getting competitive advantages ( Liao et al., 2007 ). The researchers argued that knowledge sharing helps the dynamic capability of an individual and organization to develop new products, engage the entrepreneur to absorb the change, show willingness for competitive advantages ( Carmeli et al., 2013 ; Kang and Lee, 2017 ). Moreover, Lin and Wu (2014) explored that dynamic capability is the combination of designed structure and learning of different activities, which helps the entrepreneur and organization in daily routine work. Dynamic capability helps in managing the inner capacities of an organization and assists in performance. Therefore, knowledge management is not enough to enhance performance until considering knowledge sharing as a dynamic capability in relation to entrepreneurial and organizational performance ( Rafique et al., 2018 ). Therefore, this study posited that;

H1a: Knowledge sharing capacity has a positive influence on dynamic capability.

H1b: Knowledge sharing capacity has a positive influence on entrepreneurial performance.

H1c: Knowledge sharing capacity has a positive influence on organizational performance.

Relationship Between Innovative Capacity, Dynamic Capability, Entrepreneurial and Organizational Performance

Innovative capacity is considered as an important factor to innovate something new or different ( Furman et al., 2002 ). In the context of innovative capacity, the use of skills to create new ideas with an association of vision and capabilities ( Lawson and Lorenz, 1999 ). Every organization plans to start a new corporation with a unique approach, the challenge is not only to discover an excellent idea but also to invent an opportunity that helps the entrepreneur to build with innovative capacity ( Halkos and Skouloudis, 2018 ). There are less empirical researches proves that innovative capacity and organizational performance growth parallel ( Hernández-Perlines et al., 2019 ). Gieske et al. (2016) argue that innovative capacity is based on human and capital resources; it also depends on the overall infrastructure of the organization and the combination of a proactive and innovative environment. The process of commercialization of an organization has interacted through innovative capacity, which directly affects and increases the percentage of organizational performance in the market.

The absorption of external knowledge prepares the entrepreneur to increase the innovative capacity ( Wu et al., 2017 ). Innovative capacity determined the organizational culture, leadership characteristics, procedure of product invention, and the use of strategies in launching new products with organizational performance ( Proksch et al., 2017 ). Many studies have been conducted to consider the role of innovative capacity and its relation with dynamic capability in organizational performance ( Najmi et al., 2018 ). Organizations with innovative capacity and proactive behavior change the business environment to improve performance ( Zhou et al., 2019 ). Furthermore, researchers explored that innovative capacity raises the energy level of an organization, which positively influences on organizational performance ( Fainshmidt et al., 2016 ).

Ferreira et al. (2020b) described innovation is the process to improve and launch a new product in the market, enhance product quality and productivity through the development of the manufacturing process and its adoption. García-Sánchez et al. (2018) explained that as the level of innovative capacity becomes higher; it gives an edge to the entrepreneurial performance by using dynamic capabilities. The entrepreneur utilizes dynamic capabilities to absorb innovation for competitive advantages. Moreover, the innovative capacity differentiates entrepreneurs and organizations across the market due to their competitive dynamic capabilities. The innovative capacity and dynamic capability associate to attain the performance in a professional setting ( Liu et al., 2018 ). Considering the innovative capacity as a vital dynamic capability lead toward the entrepreneurial and organizational performance of textile-based SMEs, this study hypothesized that;

H2a: Innovative capacity has a positive impact on dynamic capability.

H2b: Innovative capacity has a positive influence on entrepreneurial performance.

H2c: Innovative capacity has a positive influence on organizational performance.

Relationship Between Absorptive Capacity, Dynamic Capability, Entrepreneurial and Organizational Performance

Absorptive capacity assists the entrepreneurs in understanding and utilizing valuable information, to build marketing strategies, which generate long term financial profit and increase the performance ( Kale et al., 2019 ). The significant relationship between absorptive capacity and dynamic capability has been proved by Latukha and Veselova (2019) and further included the process of evaluation and adaptation for entrepreneurial performance in an organization. Liu et al. (2020) proposed that imminent absorptive capacity and comprehended absorptive capacity are essential, rather than adequate, and to attain competitive organizational benefits, both expected and comprehended capability plays a significant role in enhancing the performance. Absorptive capability is a blend of potential absorptive capability and comprehended absorptive capability, and is known as potential competency, which permits an organization to increase, assimilate, integrate, transfer and utilize new knowledge for the organizational and entrepreneurial performance ( Chaudhary and Batra, 2018 ).

Furthermore, Ahn et al. (2016) proposed that the firm’s absorptive capacity plays a beneficial role in the research and development activities and organizational learning of the firms. Therefore, the firms with a high level of absorptive capacity lead the firms to enhance their innovation performance. Additionally, Xue et al. (2019) asserted that the firm’s absorptive capacity is considered to be critical to the firm’s innovative capabilities. Ince et al. (2016) endorsed the positive influence of absorptive capacity on dynamic capability, which improves entrepreneurial skills. The absorptive capacity allows entrepreneurs or organizations to absorb internal and external knowledge, which is necessary to gain ideas and implications for performance strategies. Few studies focused on the firms’ absorptive capacity in deriving technological information from external means and how it contributes to organizational skills and activities ( Verma et al., 2017 ; Chaudhary, 2019 ). Absorptive capacity is not only a base for organizational performance, but other factors are also involved, such as entrepreneurial performance ( Rangus and Slavec, 2017 ). Therefore, absorptive capacity has been considered as an important part of dynamic capability, which boosts the performance of textile-based SMEs.

H3a: Absorptive capacity has a positive impact on dynamic capability.

H3b: Absorptive capacity has a positive influence on entrepreneurial performance.

H3c: Absorptive capacity has a positive influence on organizational performance.

Relationship Between Dynamic Capability, Entrepreneurial and Organizational Performance

Dynamic capability is the part of the entrepreneurial restructuring and environmental changes, which is directly linked with its performance. In high-tech firms, the dynamic capabilities of an entrepreneur are the most reliable and sound source for taking advantage ( Jiang et al., 2018 ). Raza et al. (2018) dynamic capabilities cover sensing, reconfiguring, and seizing capability of a performance organization. The dynamic capabilities of an organization guide in utilizing valuable resources during the performance ( Zhou et al., 2019 ). Moreover, dynamic capability help to innovate a new product accepts to create and show its willingness to achieve competitive advantage through knowledge sharing behavior. In some organizations, employees are afraid to share knowledge with entrepreneurs and other colleagues to hinder the progress of other co-workers ( Falasca et al., 2017 ). Prior researchers believed that, once the discouraging knowledge sharing behavior establish in an organization environment, it will be unfavorable, difficult to change ( Ha and Lo, 2018 ; Ferreira et al., 2020a ).

Looking into previous studies resource-based theory explored the relationship between the dynamic capability of an entrepreneur and entrepreneurial performance ( Battisti and Deakins, 2017 ; Wang and Kim, 2017 ). The dynamic capability of an entrepreneur assists in facing new challenges, exploring opportunities to maintain and develop organizational performance. The decision-making power and dynamic capability of an organization with market strategies enhance innovative capacity, which assists in-process and technological innovation ( Rafique et al., 2018 ). The researcher suggested that procedure of attaining, developing, distributing, and providing services from dealers to customers with dynamic organizational capabilities enhance organizational performance ( Pezeshkan et al., 2016 ). Moreover, the organization requires peripheral resources to supplement the inefficiency of their internal skills and actions with dynamic capability for organizational performance ( Bamel and Bamel, 2018 ).

Now a day’s many organizations are working on people as a resource for performance. The employee-driven force, with dynamic capability in an organization, plays a significant impact on competitive advantages and organizational performance ( Braganza et al., 2017 ). Organizations with dynamic capability overcome the competitor threats and block the competitor’s actions ( Likoum et al., 2020 ); it minimizes the expected competitor’s actions with potential adverse in organizational performance and facilitates the entrepreneurs and organization with idea creation. Therefore, the following hypotheses are proposed:

H4a: Dynamic capability has a positive impact on entrepreneurial performance.

H5a: Dynamic capability has a positive impact on organizational performance.

Mediating Effect of Dynamic Capability

Prior researchers argued that dynamic capability has a positive impact on organizational performance ( Xing et al., 2020 ). Dynamic capability helps to develop a new product by knowledge sharing capacity of the entrepreneur within the organization ( Wang and Kim, 2017 ). Knowledge sharing increases the knowledge resource with a considerable role of the dynamic capability to achieve a competitive advantage ( Kang and Lee, 2017 ). Researchers explored that innovative capacity raises the energy level of an organization, which positively influences performance ( Proksch et al., 2017 ). Moreover, organizations with a higher level of innovative capacity are more prone to perform well, and in a better position to recognize market opportunities ( Torabi and El-Den, 2017 ). The absorptive capacity of an entrepreneur absorbs the innovative technology and makes it feasible for an organization to accumulate the resources for objectives and competitive advantages ( Kale et al., 2019 ). Furthermore, in a similar context, absorptive capacity, and dynamic capability are found fundamental to organizational success ( Ferreira et al., 2020b ). Organizations with a higher absorptive capacity assist in learning from competitors with firm dynamic capabilities as well as demonstrate the knowledge in organizations for better performance ( Latukha and Veselova, 2019 ).

There is a considerable role in dynamic capability as a mediator between organizational performance and knowledge management practices. The proper utilization of dynamic capability is acquired knowledge, innovative, and absorptive capacities lead the performance of an entrepreneur and organization ( Likoum et al., 2020 ). Therefore, this study incorporates the mediating role of dynamic capability in the relationship between knowledge management practices such as knowledge sharing, innovative, and absorptive capacity with entrepreneurial and organizational performance. Therefore, the following hypotheses are proposed:

H4b: Dynamic capability mediates the relationship between knowledge sharing capacity and entrepreneurial performance.

H5b: Dynamic capability mediates the relationship between knowledge sharing capacity and organizational performance.

H4c: Dynamic capability mediates the relationship between innovative capacity and entrepreneurial performance.

H5c: Dynamic capability mediates the relationship between innovative capacity and organizational performance.

H4d: Dynamic capability mediates the relationship between absorptive capacity and entrepreneurial performance.

H5d: Dynamic capability mediates the relationship between absorptive capacity and organizational performance.

Relationship Between Entrepreneurial and Organizational Performance

Entrepreneurial performance is concerned with risk-taking and decision-making attitude, product invention for the organization, and market innovation ( Kantur, 2016 ). Entrepreneurial performance associated with the new values and creativity, time, resources, risks, and another ingredient toward organizational performance ( Miao et al., 2017 ). The prior studies show that entrepreneurial performance can lead the firm performance ( Chavez et al., 2017 ; Al-Henzab et al., 2018 ). Moreover, prior studies argued that entrepreneurial performance is an essential factor for the long term survival and development of the organization ( Hartono and Halim, 2014 ). Al-Dhaafri et al. (2016) found that entrepreneurial performance always has a positive influence on organizational performance and can help organizations to achieve competitive advantages. Furthermore, Filser and Eggers (2014) examined the role of entrepreneurial performance on organizational performance researching different countries such as Austria, Liechtenstein, and Switzerland, which found that entrepreneurial performance significantly influenced SME’s development. Thus, entrepreneurial performance enabling the achievement of organizational performance and propose the following hypothesis.

H6: Entrepreneurial performance has a positive impact on organizational performance.

The Moderating Role of Opportunity Recognition in the Relationship Between Entrepreneurial and Organizational Performance

Opportunity recognition proposed that the cognitive of different entrepreneur’s results are different in the entrepreneurial process and performance ( Hmieleski and Baron, 2008 ). Hasan et al. (2016) discussed the mediating role of opportunity recognition in association with entrepreneurial performance and found it as a critical factor in enhancing entrepreneurial performance. Furthermore, a large number of scholars suggested that self-made strategies of an entrepreneur play a significant role in the process of opportunity recognition ( Bagheri, 2017 ; Ploum et al., 2018 ). However, due to less focus by researchers on this crucial factor, we incorporate opportunity recognition in this study to measure its impact on the relationship between dynamic capability and entrepreneurial performance. Therefore, competitive advantages are important for entrepreneurs and also impact organizational performance until unless dynamic capabilities put through, and capabilities are important for performance ( Teece et al., 2016 ).

Opportunity recognition is to recognize the capabilities to attain the best source from the market for competitive advantages and entrepreneurial performance ( Teece, 2016 ). Entrepreneurial opportunities are renowned through circumstances that new goods, services, raw materials, and procedures could be offered and commercialized at advanced value than the production budget. There is a deficiency in opportunity recognition, concerning entrepreneurial performance ( George et al., 2016 ), and the efficacious entrepreneur always chooses appropriate opportunity with competences ( Kim et al., 2018 ), formerly and subsequently business ventures leads to the successful entrepreneurial performance. Opportunity recognition plays a vital role in entrepreneurial performance.

The opportunity for organizational performance, positive entrepreneur behavior, dynamic capabilities, market knowledge, positioning of services provide more opportunities to acquire the market to grow and survive ( Jantunen et al., 2005 ). The researchers argue that organizations with dynamic capabilities obtain more competitive advantages than other firms, and opportunity recognition gives a chance for better performance in product development and organizational performance ( Chirico and Nordqvist, 2010 ; Swoboda and Olejnik, 2016 ). However, there is less focus on SME’s empirical research related to the moderating role of opportunity recognition and its drivers in smaller organizations. Ferreira et al. (2020a) focused on the dynamic organizational capabilities in small organizations with opportunities for competitive advantages.

Sanz-Velasco (2006) argued that market interaction and entrepreneurs’ life experiences related to the market, industrial knowledge, and resources should be considered for opportunity recognition. The researchers proposed that an opportunity may have an impression of vaguely distinct market needs, which means that potential consumers may or may not have the capability to articulate their demands and interests ( Roundy et al., 2018 ; Li et al., 2020b ). The identification of the needs of a customer might lead to a prompt appearance of opportunity recognition, which is a result of better organizational performances ( Hu et al., 2018 ).

Besides, the researchers suggested that market potential influences the opportunity recognition in the process of product development ( Obschonka and Hahn, 2018 ; Neneh, 2019 ). Therefore, the idea of entrepreneurship is related to the process of evaluation, discovery, exploration, sources, and recognition of opportunities that highly influence the entrepreneurial and organizational performance ( Campos, 2017 ). Thus, this study postulates that better opportunity recognition would lead to higher organizational and entrepreneurial performance and formulate the following hypothesis:

H7a: Opportunity recognition positively moderates the relationship between dynamic capability and entrepreneur performance.

H7b: Opportunity recognition positively moderates the relationship between dynamic capability and organizational performance.

Materials and Methods

Sample and data collection.

The nature of this study was cross-sectional and data were collected through a convenience sampling technique. Figure 1 shows the conceptual model of the study. The target population was the SME’s of Pakistan because SME’s were considered as the backbone industry of Pakistan. Moreover, we selected big cities such as Lahore, Faisalabad, Sheikhupura, Karachi, Multan, and Sialkot of Pakistan for data collection. To avoid the issue of common method bias ( Podsakoff et al., 2012 ), we collected data in two rounds using the time-lag approach. In the first round, we collected data for knowledge management practices and dynamic capability measures. In the second round, we collected data for entrepreneurial and organizational performance and opportunity recognition. However, due to the unavailability of registered SME’s in Pakistan, we contacted small and medium chambers of commerce of every city to provide the list of SMEs, after getting the list from the chamber we contacted the SME’s owners through emails and personal visits.

Figure 1. Conceptual model.

Furthermore, we distributed 600 paper-pencil questionnaires to the respondents who positively respond to us on email and personal visits. We ensured them that this research is purely for academic purposes and the information will be confidential. The original draft of the questionnaire was in English and Urdu language because some of the SME’s owners were illiterate. Finally, in the initial screening, we received 508 questionnaires with a participation rate was 84.6% and 22 responses were dropped due to missing data. Thus, the final sample size was 486 responses. Among the valid responses, all the respondents were male and the age of respondents was starting from 18 years to 47 years and above. The highest age range of respondents was 33–39 (32.30%). Additionally, the highest work experience of the respondent was 1–5 years (26.13%) and the region of SMEs was Faisalabad, Lahore, Sialkot, Sheikhupura, Karachi, and Multan. The highest response rate was from Faisalabad 119 (24.48%) and the lowest response rate was from Sialkot 31 (6.37%).

To ensure the realistic and effective content of the research model, a structured questionnaire was compiled, and all exogenous variables were constructed and operationalized from the existing literature of knowledge sharing capacity, innovative capacity, absorptive capacity, dynamic capability, and opportunity recognition, entrepreneurial and organizational performance. To measure the 41 constructs, we used a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 strongly disagree to 5 strongly agree to quantify the results.

Knowledge Sharing Capacity

To measure knowledge sharing capacity five items were adapted from the study of Hsu et al. (2007) . This scale is widely accepted and used by previous researchers ( Davenport and Prusak, 1998 ; Keikha, 2018 ). A sample item, “I frequently participate in knowledge sharing activities.”

Innovative Capacity

To assess innovative capacity we have adopted five measurement constructs from the study of Hurley and Hult (1998) . A sample item “risk-taking is encouraged in our firm.”

Absorptive Capacity

To measure absorptive capacity four items were used developed by Leal-Rodríguez et al. (2014) . A sample item “our firm regularly considers the consequences of changing market demand in terms of new ways to provide services.”

Dynamic Capability

A dynamic capability was measured using two dimensions exploration and exploitation, with 3 items each. This scale was adapted from the study of Atuahene-Gima (2005) . This scale was used by previous researchers ( Ferreira et al., 2020a ). A sample item for exploration “acquired manufacturing technologies and skills entirely new the firm.” A sample item off exploitation “upgraded current knowledge and skills for familiar products and technologies.”

Opportunity Recognition

The five measurement items for opportunity recognition taken from the study of Kuckertz et al. (2017) . A sample item “my organization always alert to business opportunities.”

Entrepreneurial Performance

To measure entrepreneurial performance, we used eleven items scale developed by Colbert et al. (2008) . A sample item “entrepreneurs: forms goals, allocates resources to meet them, and monitors progress toward them.”

Organizational Performance

To examine organizational performance, four items were adopted from the study ( García-Morales et al., 2008 ). A sample item “return on assets.”

Data Analysis Technique

We used the partial least square structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) technique to test the measurement model and structural model results. The Smart-PLS3 software is used to cover the flaws in the data and bring fluency in data results. This software is also used to estimate the causal and empirical model relationship between the variables as well as examine the correlation between constructs, respectively ( Hair et al., 2010 ). Nowadays this software is considered as a silver bullet in the field of management science research and used by several researchers to test the hypotheses results ( Hair et al., 2011 ; Li et al., 2020a ).

Measurement of Model

The fitness of the model was assessed through reliability and validity analysis. Table 1 shows the values for Cronbach’s alpha (CA), rho_A, the average value extracted (AVE), and composite reliability (CR). The values of convergent validity should be higher than the thrush hold values; rho_A ≥ 0.7, CR ≥ 0.8, AVE ≥ 0.50, and CA ≥ 0.80. Therefore, it is seen that all the constructs were above a threshold value and acceptable range as benchmark suggested by Nunally and Bernstein (1978) . Moreover, the values for Cronbach’s alpha was 0.936–0.953, values for AVE was 0.666–0.839, value for rho_A was 0.934–0.954, and values of CR was 0.952–0.964.

Table 1. Construct reliability and validity.

Discriminant Validity

Discriminant validity was measured using two criteria’s Fornell–Larcker and Heterotrait-Mono-Trait Ratio (HTMT). Table 2 shows the results of Fornell–Larcker criteria, as per this criterion the square root of AVE is called discriminant validity ( Fornell and Larcker, 1981 ). Therefore, it is observed in Table 2 the values were higher than the correlations was discriminant validity. Furthermore, HTMT criteria were also applied to analyze the discriminant validity. As per this criterion, the values for HTMT should be less than one ( Henseler et al., 2015 ). It is seen in Table 3 all the values of HTMT are up to the threshold value. Thus, there was no issue in discriminant validity.

Table 2. Fornell-larcker criterion.

Table 3. HTMT ratio criterion.

Structural Model

The structural model was measured through a bootstrapping test and the level of significance. The fitness of the structural model was assessed through standardized root means square residual (SRMR). According to Henseler et al. (2015) a value of a good model should have a <0.08 of SRMR value. Thus, the value for SRMR was 0.043 which below the threshold value. Moreover, the structural model explained R 2 26.5% variance in dynamic capability, 25.2% variance in entrepreneurial performance, and 30.6% variance in organizational performance. According to Chin (1998) desired values of R 2 must be greater than 0.1 or zero. Hence, the structural model results of R 2 were greater than 0.1 values which show the positive predictive significance of the model.

Testing of Hypotheses

The results of the hypotheses were shown in Table 4 and Figure 2 . This study proposed H1a KSC positively influence on DC and the results indicate that KSC has a positive and significant impact on dynamic capability (β = 0.203 ∗∗ , t = 4.567, and p < 0.001). Moreover, we predicted H1b KSC positively influence on EP and the findings illustrate that KSC positively related to the EP (β = 0.157 ∗∗ , t = 3.116, and p < 0.002). Meanwhile, we proposed H1c KSC positively effect on OP and the outcome indicates that KSC has a positive impact on OP (β = 0.225 ∗∗ , t = 4.149, and p < 0.001). Thus, H1a, H1b, and H1c were accepted.

Table 4. Path coefficients (direct effects).

Figure 2. Structural model.

Furthermore, we predicted H2a IC positively influence on DC and results explain that IC has a positive and significant influence on DC (β = 0.188 ∗∗ , t = 4.470, and p < 0.001). Moreover, we proposed that H2b IC positively affects EP and the findings indicate that IC has a positive and significant impact on EP (β = 0.228 ∗∗ , t = 5.192, and p < 0.001). Besides, we predicted H2c IC positively influence on OP and the results illustrate that IC has a positive effect on OP (β = 0.139 ∗∗ , t = 3.191, and p < 0.001). Hence, H2a, H2b, and H2c were supported.

Additionally, we assumed that H3a AC positively influences on DC and the findings indicate that AC has a positive and significant impact on DC (β = 0.237 ∗∗ , t = 4.829, and p < 0.001). Moreover, we proposed H3b AC positively effects EP and the results show that AC has a positive and significant influence on EP (β = 0.174 ∗∗ , t = 3.641, and p < 0.001). Furthermore, we predicted H3c AC positively impact on OP and findings illustrate that AC also has a positive and significant impact on OP (β = 0.116 ∗∗ , t = 2.588, and p < 0.010). Therefore, H3a, H3b, and H3c were accepted.

Lastly we, predicted H4a that DC positively effects on EP and results indicate that DC positively influence on EP (β = 0.142 ∗∗ , t = 3.020, and p < 0.003). Moreover, we proposed H5a DC positively effect on OP and findings show that DC has a positive and significant impact on OP (β = 0.165 ∗∗ , t = 3.540, and p < 0.001). Furthermore, we predicted H6 EP positively leads to OP and the outcomes explain that EP has a positive and significant influence on OP (β = 0.110 ∗∗ , t = 2.063, and p < 0.039). Thus, H4a, H5a, and H6 were also supported.

We tested the mediating effect of dynamic capability in the relationship between knowledge sharing capacity, innovative and absorptive capacity with entrepreneurial and organizational performance and results were shown in Table 5 . We proposed H4b DC mediates positively between KSC and EP and we found that DC has a positive indirect effect in the relationship between KSC and EP (β = 0.029 ∗∗ , t = 2.385, and p < 0.017). Moreover, we predicted H4c DC positively mediates between IC and EP and we found that DC has a positive indirect influence in the relationship between IC and EP (β = 0.027 ∗∗ , t = 2.398, and p < 0.017). Furthermore, we supposed H4d DC mediates the AC and EP and the results indicate that DC has a positive and significant indirect impact in the relationship between AC and EP (β = 0.034 ∗∗ , t = 0.013, and p < 0.011).

Table 5. Mediation analysis (indirect effects).

Additionally, we predicted H5b DC positively mediates the relationship between KSC and OP and we found that DC has a positive indirect influence in the relationship KSC and OP (β = 0.033 ∗∗ , t = 2.737, and p < 0.006). Besides, we proposed H5c DC mediates positively between AC and OP and findings show that DC has a positive indirect effect in the relationship between AC and OP (β = 0.039 ∗∗ , t = 2.902, and p < 0.004). Meanwhile, we proposed H5d DC positively mediates between IC and OP and we found that DC also has an indirect effect in the relationship between IC and OP (β = 0.031 ∗∗ , t = 2.507, and p < 0.012). Hence, H5b, H5c, H5d were accepted.

The Moderating Role of Opportunity Recognition

The moderating role of OR was also testified with the help of structural model results. Table 6 and Figure 3 show the moderating impact of OR in the relationship between DC with EP and OP. Moreover, we tested H7a OR to have a significant and positive moderation effect in the relationship between DC and EP. The results indicate that OR strengthening the relationship between DC and EP (β = 0.107 ∗∗ , t = 4.135, and p < 0.001). Furthermore, we predicted H7b OR in the relationship between DC and OP and the findings show that OR strengthening the positive and significant role in the relationship between DC and OP (β = 0.143 ∗∗ , t = 3.221, and p < 0.001). Therefore, H7a and H7b were accepted.

Table 6. Moderating effects.

Figure 3. Interaction of OP and DC with EP and OR.

Common Method Bias and Multicollinearity Test

Common method bias and variance inflation factor (VIF) factors (multicollinearity) were also performed. We used Harman’s test to find out the common method bias in the data. According to Harman (1976) if all the factors merged in principle rotated matrix and the initial eigenvalue explaining >50% of the variance. There is an issue of common method bias. Therefore, we performed the analysis using principle rotated matrix and the factors emerged from factor analysis and the first factor of initial eigenvalue explaining 40.24% of the total variance. Thus, there is no issue of common method bias in the data. Furthermore, the VIF test also performed. As suggested by Aiken et al. (1991) value of VIF should be between the 5 to 10 were acceptable and if the values were above 10 there is an issue in multicollinearity. The output of Table 7 shows that there is no issue of multicollinearity in the data.

Table 7. Cross loadings.

This study investigates the impact of dynamic capability as a mediator and the role of opportunity recognition as a moderator between dynamic capability with entrepreneurial and organizational performance. The study path coefficient provides empirical support to the proposed hypotheses and found significant findings with p -value < 0.05 and t -value > 2. The results support our hypothesis H1a knowledge sharing capacity predicts greater DC, which supported the explanation and consistent with the prior studies of Chirico and Nordqvist (2010) and Ferreira et al. (2020b) . The dynamic capability is helpful incompetency to figure, integrate, and reconfigure internal and external capability to enhance rapid change in the environment. The result of H1b offers that knowledge sharing capacity has a positive relationship with entrepreneurial performance and the findings are in line with the previous researchers commented on by Hsu et al. (2007) and Liao et al. (2007) . The result of H1c confirms that knowledge sharing capacity has a significant impact on organizational performance and commented with the studies of Torabi and El-Den (2017) and Ali et al. (2019) .

The result of H2a proposed that innovative capacity influenced dynamic capability and the outcome is consistent with the prior studies of Hung et al. (2010) and Ferreira et al. (2020b) . The result of H2b offers that innovative capacity has a positive impact on entrepreneurial performance and the finding is similar to a prior study of Jantunen et al. (2005) . The outcome of H2c proposed that innovative capacity positively influenced organizational performance and finding is matched with the previous study of Furman et al. (2002) .

Moreover, the finding of H3a found that absorptive capacity positively affects dynamic capability and the results are consistent with existing studies ( Chaudhary and Batra, 2018 ; Kale et al., 2019 ). Meanwhile, the result of H3b suggested that absorptive capacity positively influenced entrepreneurial performance, and finding is matched with the study of Kang and Lee (2017) . The result of H3c supported that absorptive capacity has a positive impact on organizational performance and the finding is in line with the previous researcher ( Chaudhary, 2019 ).

The finding of H4a dynamic capability has a positive influence on entrepreneurial performance. This result is consistent with the prior scholar ( Ferreira et al., 2020b ). Furthermore, the H5a result stated that dynamic capability positively and significantly related to the organizational performance, and finding is matched to the existing study of Fainshmidt et al. (2016) . Besides, the result of H6 suggested that entrepreneurial performance significantly influenced organizational performance, and the result of H4b stated that dynamic capability as a mediating effect in the relationship between knowledge sharing capacity and entrepreneurial performance. This finding is similar to previous researchers ( Hsu et al., 2007 ; Swoboda and Olejnik, 2016 ; Torabi and El-Den, 2017 ). The result of H4c confirms that innovative capacity trigger dynamic capability on entrepreneurial performance and the result is consistent with ( Hung et al., 2010 ). The result of H4d stated that dynamic capability positively mediates the relationship with absorptive capacity and entrepreneurial performance and finding is confirmed to ( Ahn et al., 2016 ).

Additionally, the result of H5b suggested that dynamic capability positively mediates in the relationship between knowledge sharing capacity and organizational performance, and the findings are consistent with prior studies of Protogerou et al. (2012) and Teece (2016) . The finding of H5c recommended that dynamic capability positively mediates in the relationship between absorptive capacity and organizational performance. This result is similar to Zhou et al. (2019) . The result of H5d found that dynamic capability positively mediates the relationship between innovative capacity and organizational performance. This finding is matched to ( Bamel and Bamel, 2018 ).

Lastly, the result of H7a found that opportunity recognition positively moderates the relationship between dynamic capability and entrepreneurial performance. The finding stated that opportunity recognition strengthens the positive and significant moderation effect on the relationship between dynamic capability and entrepreneurial performance. This output is consistent with prior studies of Sanz-Velasco (2006) and Roundy et al. (2018) . Moreover, the result of H7b suggested that opportunity recognition moderates in the relationship between dynamic capability and organizational performance. This result is also in line with the prior findings of researchers ( Jiang et al., 2018 ; Ploum et al., 2018 ).

This research extends the existing literature by exploring the importance of knowledge management practices, dynamic capabilities, and opportunity recognition to increase SME’s entrepreneurial and organizational performance. Numerous researches have been devoted to evaluating the SME’s performance and recognized the role of knowledge management practices with dynamic capabilities to achieve appropriate results. Therefore, the dynamic capabilities of SMEs in the term or knowledge management practices via capabilities and opportunities play a vital role in entrepreneurial and organizational performance. The finding of this research indicated that knowledge management practices regulate the SME’s entrepreneurial and organizational performance with the significant values of beta coefficient, t -values, and p -values. Furthermore, results suggested that dynamic capabilities play a vital role in SME’s performance, and opportunity recognition moderates the relationship between dynamic capability with entrepreneurial and organizational performance. These arguments narrate how knowledge management practices assist entrepreneurs and organizations in performance, which may positively affect on unemployment and economic growth in a country.

Practical Implications

This study has some practical implications for industry practitioners, the SME sector, and researchers in the field of entrepreneurship and organizational performance. Firstly, the study contributes to the scientific literature of SME’s performances, knowledge management capacities, dynamic capabilities, and opportunities. For a better understanding of government and non-government textile-based SME sectors, recommended deriving from this research result, which is beneficial in reducing the graph of failure business. Secondly, this study suggested that textile-based SMEs with less performance will get much assistance through this research. Thirdly, this study helps SMEs to establish a more effective way to transfer knowledge in an organization to develop a strong environment for achieving organizational goals-against competitors. It is important for the organizational operation and emerging economies because the organization faces a shortage of internal and external information, which affects the SME’s performance. Fourthly, with the help of dynamic capabilities, SMEs develop the organizational and entrepreneurial quality across the organizational boundaries. Furthermore, this study also brings riven literature on knowledge management capacities into a broader perspective for SME’s performances.

Limitations and Future Research Directions

The study has few limitations, which need to be acknowledged. The data was collected from one source or the same source. The limitation for the cross-sectional nature of data also exists, and for future research, for researchers, longitudinal data is recommended. For future research direction, this model will assist in multi-disciplinary SMEs, to raise the level of entrepreneurial and organizational performance in Pakistan. The precise and better conclusion for researchers may consider demographics, government policies, and regulation for SMEs as control variables. Here, another limitation related to the study, the sample population was bound to the gender and capture 100% of males due to the selected region. The business was based on male category businesses. This research finding may be affected due to gender discrimination. So, for future research replication to the current study should consider the gender composition. Finally, the proposed model of research was tested on Pakistani male entrepreneurs and organizations running through the male businessman. However, for future recommendation, the research may consider more and different industries, including big-size sample data with male and female entrepreneurs. This research may replicate and increase in the research model for applicability to find.

Furthermore, future researchers also conduct a similar pattern of research in a different time frame. As it is aforementioned that knowledge and innovation capacity is not constant it grew and may enhance as the context evolved with development. Hence, the knowledge and learning ability of a person may vary as time passes. It’s the main course of reason to suggest future researchers conduct a longitudinal study for the spectrum presented in this research.

Data Availability Statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Ethics Statement

Ethical review and approval was not required for the study on human participants in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent for participation was not required for this study in accordance with the national legislation and the institutional requirements.

Author Contributions

SA conceived the idea and developed a proposed model to discuss. All authors provided critical feedback and helped to shape the research, analysis, and manuscript. CL led the whole project and direct in all steps, she refined the idea and directed all authors to move on. SA and IB collectively worked to design the research plan. They encouraged FS and MR to investigate and pilot testing. Further all authors participated in data collection. MM and NS developed the theory and SA helped him to perform the computations. FS and IB verified the analytical methods. SA and MM took the lead in writing the manuscript and supervised the findings of this work. All authors discussed the results and contributed to the final manuscript. All authors provided critical feedback and helped to shape the research, analysis, and manuscript. At the final stage and revision of the manuscript MM, NS, and MR prepared the document according to the mutually decided pattern which has considered as the best presentation of prescribed research design.

This work was supported by the self-organized cluster entrepreneurship behavior reform, evolution, and promotion strategies study (No. 16BGL028), the China National Social Science Foundation; the study on Bottleneck and Innovation of Postindustrial Intellectual Capital Development in Jiangsu Province (No. 14JD009), Jiangsu Province Social Science Foundation Project; and perception of fairness in self-organized mass Entrepreneurship (No. 4061160023).

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Abuaddous, H. Y., Al Sokkar, A. A., and Abualodous, B. I. (2018). The impact of knowledge management on organizational performance. Int. J. Adv. Comput. Sci. Appl. 9, 204–208.

Google Scholar

Abubakar, A. M., Elrehail, H., Alatailat, M. A., and Elçi, A. (2019). Knowledge management, decision-making style and organizational performance. J. Innov. Knowl. 4, 104–114. doi: 10.1016/j.jik.2017.07.003

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ahn, J. M., Ju, Y., Moon, T. H., Minshall, T., Probert, D., Sohn, S. Y., et al. (2016). Beyond absorptive capacity in open innovation process: the relationships between openness, capacities and firm performance. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 28, 1009–1028. doi: 10.1080/09537325.2016.1181737

Aiken, L. S., West, S. G., and Reno, R. R. (1991). Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Akhavan, P., Ebrahim, N. A., Fetrati, M. A., and Pezeshkan, A. (2016). Major trends in knowledge management research: a bibliometric study. Scientometrics 107, 1249–1264. doi: 10.1007/s11192-016-1938-x

Alaarj, S., Abidin-Mohamed, Z., and Bustamam, U. S. B. A. (2016). Mediating role of trust on the effects of knowledge management capabilities on organizational performance. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 235, 729–738. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.11.074

Al-Dhaafri, H. S., Al-Swidi, A. K., and Yusoff, R. Z. B. (2016). The mediating role of total quality management between the entrepreneurial orientation and the organizational performance. TQM J. 28, 89–111. doi: 10.1108/tqm-03-2014-0033

Al-Henzab, J., Tarhini, A., and Obeidat, B. Y. (2018). The associations among market orientation, technology orientation, entrepreneurial orientation and organizational performance. Benchmarking 25, 3117–3142. doi: 10.1108/bij-02-2017-0024

Ali, A. A., Paris, L., and Gunasekaran, A. (2019). Key factors influencing knowledge sharing practices and its relationship with organizational performance within the oil and gas industry. J. Knowl. Manag. 23, 1806–1837. doi: 10.1108/jkm-06-2018-0394

Ambrosini, V., and Bowman, C. (2009). What are dynamic capabilities and are they a useful construct in strategic management? Int. J. Manag. Rev. 11, 29–49. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2008.00251.x

Antunes, H. D. J. G., and Pinheiro, P. G. (2020). Linking knowledge management, organizational learning and memory. J. Innov. Knowl. 5, 140–149. doi: 10.1016/j.jik.2019.04.002

Atuahene-Gima, K. (2005). Resolving the capability–rigidity paradox in new product innovation. J. Mark. 69, 61–83. doi: 10.1509/jmkg.2005.69.4.61

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Bagheri, A. (2017). The impact of entrepreneurial leadership on innovation work behavior and opportunity recognition in high-technology SMEs. J. High Technol. Manag. Res. 28, 159–166. doi: 10.1016/j.hitech.2017.10.003

Bamel, U. K., and Bamel, N. (2018). Organizational resources, KM process capability and strategic flexibility: a dynamic resource-capability perspective. J. Knowl. Manag. 22, 1555–1572. doi: 10.1108/jkm-10-2017-0460

Battisti, M., and Deakins, D. (2017). The relationship between dynamic capabilities, the firm’s resource base and performance in a post-disaster environment. Int. Small Bus. J. 35, 78–98. doi: 10.1177/0266242615611471

Braganza, A., Brooks, L., Nepelski, D., Ali, M., and Moro, R. (2017). Resource management in big data initiatives: processes and dynamic capabilities. J. Bus. Res. 70, 328–337. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.006

Butt, M. A., Nawaz, F., Hussain, S., Sousa, M. J., Wang, M., Sumbal, M. S., et al. (2019). Individual knowledge management engagement, knowledge-worker productivity, and innovation performance in knowledge-based organizations: the implications for knowledge processes and knowledge-based systems. Comput. Math. Organ. Theory 25, 336–356. doi: 10.1007/s10588-018-9270-z

Byukusenge, E., and Munene, J. C. (2017). Knowledge management and business performance: does innovation matter? Cogent Bus. Manag. 4:1368434.

Campos, H. M. (2017). Impact of entrepreneurial passion on entrepreneurial orientation with the mediating role of entrepreneurial alertness for technology-based firms in Mexico. J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev. 24, 353–374. doi: 10.1108/jsbed-10-2016-0166

Carmeli, A., Gelbard, R., and Reiter-Palmon, R. (2013). Leadership, creative problem-solving capacity, and creative performance: the importance of knowledge sharing. Hum. Resour. Manag. 52, 95–121. doi: 10.1002/hrm.21514

Centobelli, P., Cerchione, R., and Esposito, E. (2019). Efficiency and effectiveness of knowledge management systems in SMEs. Prod. Plan. Control 30, 779–791. doi: 10.1080/09537287.2019.1582818

Cerchione, R., and Esposito, E. (2016). A systematic review of supply chain knowledge management research: state of the art and research opportunities. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 182, 276–292. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.09.006

Chaudhary, S. (2019). Implications of strategic flexibility in small firms: the moderating role of absorptive capacity. South Asian J. Bus. Stud. 8, 370–386. doi: 10.1108/sajbs-10-2018-0104

Chaudhary, S., and Batra, S. (2018). Absorptive capacity and small family firm performance: exploring the mediation processes. J. Knowl. Manag. 22, 1201–1216. doi: 10.1108/jkm-01-2017-0047

Chavez, R., Yu, W., Jacobs, M. A., and Feng, M. (2017). Manufacturing capability and organizational performance: the role of entrepreneurial orientation. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 184, 33–46. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.10.028

Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Mod. Methods Bus. Res. 295, 295–336.

Chirico, F., and Nordqvist, M. (2010). Dynamic capabilities and trans-generational value creation in family firms: the role of organizational culture. Int. Small Bus. J. 28, 487–504. doi: 10.1177/0266242610370402

Colbert, A. E., Kristof-Brown, A. L., Bradley, B. H., and Barrick, M. R. (2008). CEO transformational leadership: the role of goal importance congruence in top management teams. Acad. Manag. J. 51, 81–96. doi: 10.5465/amj.2008.30717744

Davenport, T. H., and Prusak, L. (1998). Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage what they Know. Brighton, MA: Harvard Business Publishing.

Fainshmidt, S., Pezeshkan, A., Lance Frazier, M., Nair, A., and Markowski, E. (2016). Dynamic capabilities and organizational performance: a meta-analytic evaluation and extension. J. Manag. Stud. 53, 1348–1380. doi: 10.1111/joms.12213

Falasca, M., Zhang, J., Conchar, M., and Li, L. (2017). The impact of customer knowledge and marketing dynamic capability on innovation performance: an empirical analysis. J. Bus. Ind. Mark. 32, 901–912. doi: 10.1108/jbim-12-2016-0289

Ferreira, J., Cardim, S., and Coelho, A. (2020a). Dynamic capabilities and mediating effects of innovation on the competitive advantage and firm’s performance: the moderating role of organizational learning capability. J. Knowl. Econ. 10, 1–25.

Ferreira, J., Coelho, A., and Moutinho, L. (2020b). Dynamic capabilities, creativity and innovation capability and their impact on competitive advantage and firm performance: the moderating role of entrepreneurial orientation. Technovation 92:102061. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2018.11.004

Filser, M., and Eggers, F. (2014). Entrepreneurial orientation and performance of firms: a comparative study of Australia, Liechtenstein and Switzerland. S. Afr. J. Bus. Manag. 45, 56–62.

Fornell, C., and Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 18, 39–50. doi: 10.1177/002224378101800104

Furman, J. L., Porter, M. E., and Stern, S. (2002). The determinants of national innovative capacity. Res. Policy 31, 899–933. doi: 10.1016/s0048-7333(01)00152-4

García-Morales, V. J., Lloréns-Montes, F. J., and Verdú-Jover, A. J. (2008). The effects of transformational leadership on organizational performance through knowledge and innovation. Br. J. Manag. 19, 299–319. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8551.2007.00547.x

García-Sánchez, E., García-Morales, V. J., and Martín-Rojas, R. (2018). Influence of technological assets on organizational performance through absorptive capacity, organizational innovation and internal labour flexibility. Sustainability 10:770. doi: 10.3390/su10030770

George, N. M., Parida, V., Lahti, T., and Wincent, J. (2016). A systematic literature review of entrepreneurial opportunity recognition: insights on influencing factors. Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 12, 309–350. doi: 10.1007/s11365-014-0347-y

Gholami, M. H., Asli, M. N., Nazari-Shirkouhi, S., and Noruzy, A. (2013). Investigating the influence of knowledge management practices on organizational performance: an empirical study. Acta Polytech. Hung. 10, 205–216.

Gieske, H., van Buuren, A., and Bekkers, V. (2016). Conceptualizing public innovative capacity: a framework for assessment. Innov. J. 21:1.

Ha, S. T., and Lo, M. C. (2018). An empirical examination of knowledge management and organisational performance among Malaysian manufacturing SMEs. Int. J. Bus. Innov. Res. 17, 23–37. doi: 10.1504/ijbir.2018.10015131

Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., and Anderson, R. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis: Global Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., and Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: indeed a silver bullet. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 19, 139–152.

Halkos, G., and Skouloudis, A. (2018). Corporate social responsibility and innovative capacity: intersection in a macro-level perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 182, 291–300. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.022

Harman, H. H. (1976). Modern Factor Analysis. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Hartono, H., and Halim, E. (2014). The impact of knowledge management and entrepreneur’s knowledge on innovation and firm performance. Winners 15, 108–114. doi: 10.21512/tw.v15i2.624

Hasan, F. S., Almubarak, M. M. S., and Ahmed, A. (2016). Factors influencing women entrepreneurs’ performance in SMEs. World J. Entrep. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 12, 82–101. doi: 10.1108/wjemsd-09-2015-0037

Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., and Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 43, 115–135. doi: 10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8

Hernández-Perlines, F., Ariza-Montes, A., Han, H., and Law, R. (2019). Innovative capacity, quality certification and performance in the hotel sector. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 82, 220–230. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.04.027

Hmieleski, K. M., and Baron, R. A. (2008). Regulatory focus and new venture performance: a study of entrepreneurial opportunity exploitation under conditions of risk versus uncertainty. Strateg. Entrep. J. 2, 285–299. doi: 10.1002/sej.56

Hsu, M.-H., Ju, T. L., Yen, C.-H., and Chang, C.-M. (2007). Knowledge sharing behavior in virtual communities: the relationship between trust, self-efficacy, and outcome expectations. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 65, 153–169. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.09.003

Hu, R., Wang, L., Zhang, W., and Bin, P. (2018). Creativity, proactive personality, and entrepreneurial intention: the role of entrepreneurial alertness. Front. Psychol. 9:951. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00951

Hung, R. Y. Y., Yang, B., Lien, B. Y.-H., McLean, G. N., and Kuo, Y.-M. (2010). Dynamic capability: impact of process alignment and organizational learning culture on performance. J. World Bus. 45, 285–294. doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2009.09.003

Hurley, R. F., and Hult, G. T. M. (1998). Innovation, market orientation, and organizational learning: an integration and empirical examination. J. Mark. 62, 42–54. doi: 10.1177/002224299806200303

Ince, H., Imamoglu, S. Z., and Turkcan, H. (2016). The effect of technological innovation capabilities and absorptive capacity on firm innovativeness: a conceptual framework. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 235, 764–770. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.11.078

Jantunen, A., Puumalainen, K., Saarenketo, S., and Kyläheiko, K. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation, dynamic capabilities and international performance. J. Int. Entrep. 3, 223–243. doi: 10.1007/s10843-005-1133-2

Jiang, W., Chai, H., Shao, J., and Feng, T. (2018). Green entrepreneurial orientation for enhancing firm performance: a dynamic capability perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 198, 1311–1323. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.104

Kale, E., Aknar, A., and Başar, Ö. (2019). Absorptive capacity and firm performance: the mediating role of strategic agility. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 78, 276–283. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.09.010

Kane, G. C. (2017). The evolutionary implications of social media for organizational knowledge management. Inf. Organ. 27, 37–46. doi: 10.1016/j.infoandorg.2017.01.001

Kang, M., and Lee, M.-J. (2017). Absorptive capacity, knowledge sharing, and innovative behaviour of R&D employees. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 29, 219–232. doi: 10.1080/09537325.2016.1211265

Kantur, D. (2016). Strategic entrepreneurship: mediating the entrepreneurial orientation-performance link. Manag. Decis. 54, 24–43. doi: 10.1108/md-11-2014-0660

Keikha, F. (2018). Interpersonal trust factors affecting members’ knowledge sharing behavior in virtual communities. Iran. J. Inf. Process. Manag. 34, 275–300.

Kim, J. Y., Choi, D. S., Sung, C.-S., and Park, J. Y. (2018). The role of problem solving ability on innovative behavior and opportunity recognition in university students. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 4:4.

Kuckertz, A., Kollmann, T., Krell, P., and Stöckmann, C. (2017). Understanding, differentiating, and measuring opportunity recognition and opportunity exploitation. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 23, 78–97. doi: 10.1108/ijebr-12-2015-0290

Latukha, M., and Veselova, A. (2019). Talent management, absorptive capacity, and firm performance: does it work in China and Russia? Hum. Resour. Manag. 58, 503–519. doi: 10.1002/hrm.21930

Lawson, C., and Lorenz, E. (1999). Collective learning, tacit knowledge and regional innovative capacity. Reg. Stud. 33, 305–317. doi: 10.1080/713693555

Leal-Rodríguez, A. L., Roldán, J. L., Ariza-Montes, J. A., and Leal-Millán, A. (2014). From potential absorptive capacity to innovation outcomes in project teams: the conditional mediating role of the realized absorptive capacity in a relational learning context. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 32, 894–907. doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.01.005

Li, C., Murad, M., Shahzad, F., Khan, M. A. S., and Ashraf, S. F. (2020a). Dark tetrad personality traits and counterproductive work behavior among doctors in Pakistan. Int. J. Health Plan. Manag. 35, 1173–1192. doi: 10.1002/hpm.3025

Li, C., Murad, M., Shahzad, F., Khan, M. A. S., Ashraf, S. F., and Dogbe, C. S. K. (2020b). Entrepreneurial passion to entrepreneurial behavior: role of entrepreneurial alertness, entrepreneurial self-efficacy and proactive personality. Front. Psychol. 11:1611. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01611

Liao, S.-H., Fei, W.-C., and Chen, C.-C. (2007). Knowledge sharing, absorptive capacity, and innovation capability: an empirical study of Taiwan’s knowledge-intensive industries. J. Inf. Sci. 33, 340–359. doi: 10.1177/0165551506070739

Likoum, S. W. B., Shamout, M. D., Harazneh, I., and Abubakar, A. M. (2020). Market-sensing capability, innovativeness, brand management systems, market dynamism, competitive intensity, and performance: an integrative review. J. Knowl. Econ. 11, 593–613. doi: 10.1007/s13132-018-0561-x

Lin, Y., and Wu, L.-Y. (2014). Exploring the role of dynamic capabilities in firm performance under the resource-based view framework. J. Bus. Res. 67, 407–413. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.12.019

Liu, C.-H., Horng, J.-S., Chou, S.-F., Huang, Y.-C., and Chang, A. Y. (2018). How to create competitive advantage: the moderate role of organizational learning as a link between shared value, dynamic capability, differential strategy, and social capital. Asia Pac. J. Tour. Res. 23, 747–764. doi: 10.1080/10941665.2018.1492943

Liu, F., Dutta, D. K., and Park, K. (2020). From external knowledge to competitive advantage: absorptive capacity, firm performance, and the mediating role of labour productivity. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 1–13. doi: 10.1080/09537325.2020.1787373

Lopes, C. M., Scavarda, A., Hofmeister, L. F., Thomé, A. M. T., and Vaccaro, G. L. R. (2017). An analysis of the interplay between organizational sustainability, knowledge management, and open innovation. J. Clean. Prod. 142, 476–488. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.083

Mardani, A., Nikoosokhan, S., Moradi, M., and Doustar, M. (2018). The relationship between knowledge management and innovation performance. J. High Technol. Manag. Res. 29, 12–26.

Miao, C., Qian, S., and Ma, D. (2017). The relationship between entrepreneurial self-efficacy and firm performance: a meta-analysis of main and moderator effects. J. Small Bus. Manag. 55, 87–107. doi: 10.1111/jsbm.12240

Najmi, K., Kadir, A. R., and Kadir, M. I. A. (2018). Mediation effect of dynamic capability in the relationship between knowledge management and strategic leadership on organizational performance accountability. Int. J. Law Manag. 60, 517–529. doi: 10.1108/ijlma-01-2017-0004

Neneh, B. N. (2019). From entrepreneurial alertness to entrepreneurial behavior: the role of trait competitiveness and proactive personality. Pers. Individ. Dif. 138, 273–279. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2018.10.020

Ngah, R., Tai, T., and Bontis, N. (2016). Knowledge management capabilities and organizational performance in roads and transport authority of Dubai: the mediating role of learning organization. Knowl. Process Manag. 23, 184–193. doi: 10.1002/kpm.1504

Nunally, J. C., and Bernstein, I. H. (1978). Psychometric Theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Obschonka, M., and Hahn, E. (2018). Personal agency in newly arrived refugees: the role of personality, entrepreneurial cognitions and intentions, and career adaptability. J. Vocat. Behav. 105, 173–184. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2018.01.003

Ohemeng, F. L., and Kamga, O. (2020). Administrative leaders as institutional entrepreneurs in developing countries: a study of the development and institutionalization of performance management in Ghana’s public service. Public Adm. Dev. 40, 87–100. doi: 10.1002/pad.1867

Pezeshkan, A., Fainshmidt, S., Nair, A., Frazier, M. L., and Markowski, E. (2016). An empirical assessment of the dynamic capabilities–performance relationship. J. Bus. Res. 69, 2950–2956. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.152

Ploum, L., Blok, V., Lans, T., and Omta, O. (2018). Exploring the relation between individual moral antecedents and entrepreneurial opportunity recognition for sustainable development. J. Clean. Prod. 172, 1582–1591. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.296

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., and Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 63, 539–569. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452

Proksch, D., Haberstroh, M. M., and Pinkwart, A. (2017). Increasing the national innovative capacity: identifying the pathways to success using a comparative method. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 116, 256–270. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2016.10.009

Protogerou, A., Caloghirou, Y., and Lioukas, S. (2012). Dynamic capabilities and their indirect impact on firm performance. Ind. Corp. Change 21, 615–647. doi: 10.1093/icc/dtr049

Rafique, M., Hameed, S., and Agha, M. H. (2018). Impact of knowledge sharing, learning adaptability and organizational commitment on absorptive capacity in pharmaceutical firms based in Pakistan. J. Knowl. Manag. 22, 44–56. doi: 10.1108/jkm-04-2017-0132

Rangus, K., and Slavec, A. (2017). The interplay of decentralization, employee involvement and absorptive capacity on firms’ innovation and business performance. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 120, 195–203. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2016.12.017

Rašula, J., Vukšić, V. B., and Štemberger, M. I. (2012). The impact of knowledge management on organisational performance. Econ. Bus. Rev. 14:22.

Raza, S., Minai, M. S., ul Haq, M. A., Ismail, A. I., and Zain, A. Y. M. (2018). Entrepreneurial network towards small firm performance through dynamic capabilities: the conceptual perspective. Acad. Entrep. J. 24, 1–9.

Roundy, P. T., Harrison, D. A., Khavul, S., Pérez-Nordtvedt, L., and McGee, J. E. (2018). Entrepreneurial alertness as a pathway to strategic decisions and organizational performance. Strateg. Organ. 16, 192–226. doi: 10.1177/1476127017693970

Santoro, G., Vrontis, D., Thrassou, A., and Dezi, L. (2018). The internet of things: building a knowledge management system for open innovation and knowledge management capacity. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 136, 347–354. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.02.034

Sanz-Velasco, S. A. (2006). Opportunity development as a learning process for entrepreneurs. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. 12, 251–271. doi: 10.1108/13552550610687637

Serrat, O. (2017). Knowledge Solutions: Tools, Methods, and Approaches to Drive Organizational Performance. London: Springer Nature.

Shujahat, M., Sousa, M. J., Hussain, S., Nawaz, F., Wang, M., and Umer, M. (2019). Translating the impact of knowledge management processes into knowledge-based innovation: the neglected and mediating role of knowledge-worker productivity. J. Bus. Res. 94, 442–450. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.11.001

Swoboda, B., and Olejnik, E. (2016). Linking processes and dynamic capabilities of international SMEs: the mediating effect of international entrepreneurial orientation. J. Small Bus. Manag. 54, 139–161. doi: 10.1111/jsbm.12135

Tang, H. (2017). Effects of leadership behavior on knowledge management and organization innovation in medicine and health sciences. Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 13, 5425–5433.

Teece, D., Peteraf, M., and Leih, S. (2016). Dynamic capabilities and organizational agility: risk, uncertainty, and strategy in the innovation economy. Calif. Manag. Rev. 58, 13–35. doi: 10.1525/cmr.2016.58.4.13

Teece, D. J. (2016). Dynamic capabilities and entrepreneurial management in large organizations: toward a theory of the (entrepreneurial) firm. Eur. Econ. Rev. 86, 202–216. doi: 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2015.11.006

Torabi, F., and El-Den, J. (2017). The impact of knowledge management on organizational productivity: a case study on Koosar Bank of Iran. Procedia Comput. Sci. 124, 300–310. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2017.12.159

Verma, V., Bharadwaj, S. S., and Nanda, M. (2017). Comparing agility and absorptive capacity for superior firm performance in dynamic environment. Int. J. Bus. Environ. 9, 1–17. doi: 10.1504/ijbe.2017.10005662

Wahda, W. (2017). Mediating effect of knowledge management on organizational learning culture toward organization performance. J. Manag. Dev. 36, 846–858. doi: 10.1108/jmd-11-2016-0252

Wang, Z., and Kim, H. G. (2017). Can social media marketing improve customer relationship capabilities and firm performance? Dynamic capability perspective. J. Interact. Mark. 39, 15–26. doi: 10.1016/j.intmar.2017.02.004

Wu, J., Ma, Z., and Zhuo, S. (2017). Enhancing national innovative capacity: the impact of high-tech international trade and inward foreign direct investment. Int. Bus. Rev. 26, 502–514. doi: 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2016.11.001

Xing, X., Liu, T., Shen, L., and Wang, J. (2020). Linking environmental regulation and financial performance: the mediating role of green dynamic capability and sustainable innovation. Sustainability 12:1007. doi: 10.3390/su12031007

Xue, M., Boadu, F., and Xie, Y. (2019). The penetration of green innovation on firm performance: effects of absorptive capacity and managerial environmental concern. Sustainability 11:2455. doi: 10.3390/su11092455

Zaim, H., Muhammed, S., and Tarim, M. (2019). Relationship between knowledge management processes and performance: critical role of knowledge utilization in organizations. Knowl. Manag. Res. Pract. 17, 24–38. doi: 10.1080/14778238.2018.1538669

Zhou, S. S., Zhou, A. J., Feng, J., and Jiang, S. (2019). Dynamic capabilities and organizational performance: the mediating role of innovation. J. Manag. Organ. 25, 731–747. doi: 10.1017/jmo.2017.20

Keywords : knowledge management practices, dynamic capability, opportunity recognition, organizational performance, entrepreneurial performance, mediated-moderated model

Citation: Li C, Ashraf SF, Shahzad F, Bashir I, Murad M, Syed N and Riaz M (2020) Influence of Knowledge Management Practices on Entrepreneurial and Organizational Performance: A Mediated-Moderation Model. Front. Psychol. 11:577106. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.577106

Received: 28 June 2020; Accepted: 29 September 2020; Published: 03 December 2020.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2020 Li, Ashraf, Shahzad, Bashir, Murad, Syed and Riaz. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Sheikh Farhan Ashraf, [email protected] ; Majid Murad, [email protected]

Consulte los artículos y contenidos publicados en éste medio, además de los e-sumarios de las revistas científicas en el mismo momento de publicación

Esté informado en todo momento gracias a las alertas y novedades

Acceda a promociones exclusivas en suscripciones, lanzamientos y cursos acreditados

Estamos experimentado problemas con el acceso a las cuentas de usuarios. Disculpe la molestias

• I have forgotten my password

The Journal of Innovation and Knowledge (JIK) focuses on how we gain knowledge through innovation and how knowledge encourages new forms of innovation. Not all innovation leads to knowledge. Only enduring innovation that can be generalized across multiple fields creates theory and knowledge. JIK welcomes papers on innovations that improve the quality of knowledge or that can be used to develop knowledge. Innovation is a broad concept, covering innovation processes, structures, outcomes, antecedents, and behaviors at the organizational level in the private and public sectors as well as at the individual, national, and professional levels. JIK articles explore knowledge-related changes that introduce or encourage innovation to promote best practices within society. JIK provides an outlet for high-quality studies that have undergone double-blind peer review. In doing so, JIK ensures that such studies reach a global readership of scholars, consultants, practitioners, international leaders, and policymakers who recognize the importance of innovation and knowledge as economic drivers and who base their decisions on new ideas and findings in innovation and knowledge. JIK publishes content in the form of theoretical articles, empirical studies employing quantitative or qualitative methods, practice-oriented papers, teaching-oriented papers, case studies, book reviews, conference reports, short articles on current trends in science and society, abstracts of recent innovation and knowledge PhDs, and shorter opinion-based and review articles, commentaries, and debates. JIK publishes state-of-the-art research on emerging topics in the world of innovation and knowledge and appeals to a broad readership. The editors welcome suggestions for special issue topics. JIK articles should demonstrate contextual differences, while highlighting lessons for the wider audience. In sum, JIK is an interdisciplinary journal devoted to advancing theoretical and practical innovations and knowledge in a range of fields, including Economics, Business and Management, Engineering, Science, and Education. JIK has a broad scope to the following areas: 1. Innovation (including but not limited to: open innovation, innovation adoption and diffusion, organizational behavior and innovation, creativity, improvisation, and individual innovation, innovation in teams and groups, institutional and social innovation, consequences of innovation, critical approaches to innovation or innovation alliances and networks) in relation to knowledge, and vice versa. 2. Knowledge patterns in relation to innovation. 3. Knowledge-related changes that introduce innovations and best practices in society. 4. Globalization in innovation and knowledge. 5. Innovation policies and practices that lead to knowledge. 6. Cross-cultural case studies in knowledge and innovation. 7. New practical models and paradigms for understanding and fostering innovation and knowledge. 8. Knowledge and innovation derived from data. 9. Information systems in knowledge and innovation. 10. Knowledge and innovation in organizations and their behaviors. 11. Knowledge- and innovation-based systems, products, and processes. 12. Issues that affect the developers of education systems and educators who implement and manage innovations and knowledge. 13. Ethics in knowledge and innovation. 14. Knowledge and innovation transfer. 15. Quality in knowledge and innovation.

Indexed in:

Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Scopus, ABDC Journal Quality List, ABS (Chartered Association of Business Schools), Cabell's, EconLit, ERIH PLUS, Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), Dialnet

The Impact Factor measures the average number of citations received in a particular year by papers published in the journal during the two preceding years. © Clarivate Analytics, Journal Citation Reports 2022

CiteScore measures average citations received per document published.

SRJ is a prestige metric based on the idea that not all citations are the same. SJR uses a similar algorithm as the Google page rank; it provides a quantitative and qualitative measure of the journal's impact.

SNIP measures contextual citation impact by wighting citations based on the total number of citations in a subject field.

• Abbreviations
• Introduction
• Literature review
• Knowledge management
• Individual outcomes
• Team outcomes
• Organizational outcomes
• New product development
• Methodology
• Publication trend
• Future directions
• Limitations
• Acknowledgments
• Bibliography

This research aims to show that knowledge management is integral to business strategy and can lead to more efficient new product development in high-tech companies. Organizations have been increasingly focused on knowledge management methods as they have realized how important it is to manage knowledge to stay competitive in their marketplaces. Knowledge Management (KM) is responsible for a company's efficiency, effectiveness, and innovation. Project outcomes, individual outcomes, and organizational outcomes are linked to knowledge in New Product Development (NPD). More than 28,548 KM papers published in the previous 22 years were examined in this research using Scopus and Web of Science; the original sample was narrowed down to items that contributed to KM literature. The R Studio and VOS Viewer software executed the descriptive statistics and scientific mapping approaches using co-citation analysis. The descriptive analysis involved studying publishing patterns over time, the geographical localization of the contributing institutions, journals, the most prolific authors, the top-performing institutions, and the most-cited papers. Scholars and practitioners have been paying close attention to knowledge management and organizational performance in recent years. Once implemented, the integrated approach may significantly influence organizational processes and performance. This study examines both KM ideas in NDP initiatives. Several intriguing discoveries are presented, with extensive explanations of their future direction, a conceptual framework for the study, and practice based on the literature.

The movement and growth of organizations, particularly in business, determine a country's economy ( Islam & Abd Wahab, 2021 ). According to Belmonte-Ureña et al. (2021) and Panda et al. (2022) , a small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) can significantly impact a country's success. One of an organization's main priorities is its performance ( Hanaysha & Mehmood, 2022 ). While revenues are commonly used to evaluate a company's performance, other indicators beyond income can represent standards for evaluation. Alshurideh et al. (2022) describe that performance is a metric established by management based on the organization's results over time. Moreover, an SME is likely to accomplish success on the financial and non-financial fronts within five (5) to ten (10) years. The concept of organizational performance assessment is formed based on the combined analysis of an organization's assets, i.e., human, physical, and capital, in order to achieve certain goals; determining an SME's performance is not solely financial ( Abubakar et al., 2019 ; Lee et al., 2022 ). Lazzeretti and Capone (2016) argue that an organization's domain matters for innovation. Previous literature points out that groups tend to have better performance and possibilities while embedded in collaboration.

Businesses face numerous obstacles to staying competitive because of globalization ( Katsikeas et al., 2019 ; Mukherjee, 2018 ). They encounter intense competition from other firms and risk losing consumers quickly since most need help recognizing and adapting to rapidly changing market trends. They are now driven to move away from other management approaches and towards knowledge management due to the growing value of knowledge. Knowledge management (KM) is defined as the capacity to manage information, including gathering knowledge from internal and external sources, transforming it into new strategies or ideas, and implementing and preserving it ( de Bem Machado et al., 2022 ). In the early twentieth century, Henry Ford's creative use of the assembly line in the automobile sector aided in the broad adoption of mass production ( Öberg & Alexander, 2019 ), resulting in cheaper manufacturing costs. Manufacturing costs are a point for rivalry. Businesses develop new products and identify new product and delivery techniques for existing products to boost earnings ( Kharub et al., 2022 ). Innovation  is a term used to describe breakthroughs ( Begum et al., 2022 ). By improving an organization's performance (in terms of time, cost, and innovation) and product enhancements and differentiation, KM enables competitive advantage ( Horng et al., 2022 ). KM also facilitates incorporating current knowledge into new and creative products. SMEs have been increasingly focused on KM methods as they realize how important it is to manage knowledge to stay competitive in their marketplaces ( Adam et al., 2022 ; Ma et al., 2022 ). KM is responsible for a company's efficiency, effectiveness, and innovation ( Chen et al., 2022 ). New product development  (NPD) knowledge is linked to design or manufacturing processes ( Idrees et al., 2022 ). NPD refers to all product process phases, from product development through customer service; alternatively, it can be as simple as repositioning an existing product in a new marketplace.

Knowledge generation is the key benefit of a KM approach. Firms must anticipate market surprises, be flexible and adaptable to quick market changes, and overcome product development issues as part of their competitiveness strategy ( Galli & Lopez, 2018 ). Several studies have demonstrated that a KM strategy can help to achieve these objectives ( Adam et al., 2022 ; Chen et al., 2022 ; de Bem Machado et al., 2022 ). Investigating the link between KM capabilities and organizational, individual, and project outcomes is critical because the findings may aid firms in furthering their understanding of KM's repercussions. Practitioners are more likely to pay attention to KM strategies considering the value of knowledge as a strategic resource. According to available literature, firms heavily invest in KM projects to acquire and leverage this strategic resource ( Chen et al., 2022 ). For many firms, capturing the most critical information and successfully disseminating it throughout the company is a crucial challenge. As a result of its relation to various performance measurements, KM has become a top priority for all enterprises ( Zhang et al., 2022 ). The collective knowledge in people's thoughts is a valuable resource for today's business ( Crespo et al., 2022 ).

In the past, the key trends, results, and implications of KM research were analyzed using various methods and methodologies, including bibliometrics. Serenko (2013) , for example, employed a meta-analysis technique to bring together the numerous findings from many KM studies. Several studies have analyzed the most relevant KM papers; however, these studies had a narrow focus and needed to cover a wider variety of KM literature ( Liao, 2003 ; Massaro et al., 2015 ). Literature reviews are frequently used in studies to incorporate the available literature on KM. Wallace et al. (2011) conducted a literature evaluation on a subset of KM research, while Ayatollahi and Zeraatkar (2020) reviewed KM studies in the healthcare industry. According to Massaro et al. (2015) and Ayatollahi et al. (2020) , many KM researchers need to be aware of past publications from a bibliometric viewpoint. Now that KM has its field of study with specialized publications like “ Journal of Innovation & Knowledge ”, it becomes essential to determine the elements that can contribute to its increased visibility in the scholarly community.

This study aims to compile the best KM papers published between 2000 and 2022 and sort them by publication year, number of authors, number of references, page count, keyword density, field of study, and publisher to learn more about the parameters influencing their citation counts. The following parts detail the study's strategy, results, and recommendations for future direction.

The definition of knowledge management has sparked much controversy in literature ( Despres & Chauvel, 1999 ). Much discussion focuses on the distinctions between information and knowledge ( Mårtensson, 2000 ). Although they can be used interchangeably, several writers have indicated that the two notions are separate ( McInerney, 2002 ). Information is commonly asserted to be a component of, but not entirely of, knowledge. Knowledge is a considerably broader phrase that encompasses information-based beliefs ( Maier & Hadrich, 2011 ). It also depends on the individual's commitment and knowledge of these ideas, influenced by interpersonal interactions and the development of judgment, conduct, and attitude  ( Almashari et al., 2002 ).

On the other hand, organizational knowledge comprises corporate expertise and common understandings and shares many of the same features as personal knowledge ( Martins et al., 2019 ). Organizational learning is linked to activities and is developed inside the firm through information and social interaction, providing growth opportunities ( Awan, 2019 ; Rehman et al., 2021 ). This type of knowledge is the foundation of KM. Progress is accomplished when knowledge flows from an individual's domain to the organization's. As knowledge is difficult to measure or audit, businesses must successfully manage it to fully use the skills and experience inherent in their systems and structures and the tacit knowledge held by their personnel. It is a process that assists organizations in finding, selecting, organizing, disseminating, and transferring vital information and knowledge necessary for operations, according to Di Vaio et al. (2021) .

Ammirato et al. (2021) recently defined KM as the comprehensive process of identifying, organizing, transferring, and utilizing information and skills. According to the survey contracted by Ferreira et al. (2018) , 92.2% of business owners believe that a KM system can influence employee learning and organizational growth; 66.2% say it helps them to work together as a team. Only 91% of those surveyed believe their KM system aids them in developing new training programs based on their expertise. According to Ode and Ayavoo (2020) , more than 50% of KM initiatives fail because firms need a well-developed KM approach. Zaim et al. (2019) , p.XX) explain that "instead of managing relevant knowledge, some businesses end up managing documents … this is a common blunder since many KM technologies are focused on document management rather than knowledge management”.

Because it leads to innovation, knowledge management is an effective technique for NPD ( Lazzeretti et al., 2016 ). It is especially crucial in High Technology (high-tech) organizations since they must deal more with the market's dynamic changes than others ( Islam et al., 2021 ). The short product life cycle necessitates innovation; a high-tech company must anticipate market surprises, overcome the constraints of its own and competitors' goods, and be laser-focused on the demands of its consumers. Individual knowledge sharing is also a central core of knowledge, and it is critical to establish a collaborative organization capable of adapting to market changes quickly and achieving effectiveness ( Haider et al., 2022 ). KM is a practice that encourages an integrated approach to finding, recording, analyzing, retrieving, managing, and sharing an organization's data assets ( Cui et al., 2019 ). These assets include databases, records, regulations, procedures, and employees’ previously untapped skills and experiences. An abundance of limitations confounds information sharing among individuals in an agency ( Obrenovic et al., 2020 ). Obstacles to information-sharing are common to giant organizations and massive multinational businesses and may pose problems for those working in these environments.

When workers recognize that information-sharing is beneficial, they are more likely to engage in it. Employees can accomplish their work more efficiently if they share their expertise ( Haider et al., 2023 ). Furthermore, it aids employee retention, personal growth, and professional advancement and rewards them for completing tasks ( Nguyen, 2020 ). Personal interaction is based on communication between individuals. Problem-solving, task coordination, information exchange, and conflict resolution are facilitated by this collaboration ( Harb et al., 2021 ). This component is crucial for optimal information consumption and leads to new knowledge generation. The efficiency with which embedded knowledge is translated to embodied knowledge is favorably connected to personal interactions ( Usman et al., 2019 ). This engagement must be regular and direct, and informal networks are more important than official ones.

Global Product Development (GPD) emerged in the recent decade. ( Kherbachi et al., 2020 ). It comes with GPD team members that are geographically dispersed, speaking different languages, and from various cultural backgrounds ( Haider et al., 2022 ). They differ from co-located teams that operate in a single location, such as a nation or city region, and speak the same language. According to Cui et al. (2019) , as GPD teams become increasingly common, research is needed to create strategies for GPD teams to reach performance levels comparable to those of their co-located counterparts. A project's success depends on the relationships between the various teams ( Harb et al., 2021 ). Communicating effectively between various NPD teams and reusing existing knowledge within an organization can influence whether a new product is released on schedule and budget. Recreating and recollecting the same information for various projects is expensive and time-consuming. It demonstrates the significance of capturing and distributing pre-existing knowledge among employees so that new knowledge may be built upon, describing innovation.

By incorporating essential departments and participants from the start of the project and anticipating manufacturability concerns, the product development process may accelerate in terms of market time ( Kharub et al., 2022 ). Cross-functional teams allow shared information and choices during design and manufacturing ( Awan & Sroufe, 2020 ). They also consider customers' demands ( Hanaysha & Mehmood, 2022 ). Cross-functional teams are encouraged in the NPD process to reduce misinterpretation and encourage informal sharing. For example, Cooper (2019) defined and measured NPD team effectiveness using a systems perspective to identify a set of inputs that could influence how teams interacted and worked. He found that team inputs and processes significantly impact NPD; because they formed their expertise by integrating separate collections of tacit knowledge, team members who previously worked together were more effective than those who did not. Experience being in the same team breeds efficiency.

Organizational performance measures an organization's capacity to meet the needs of its stakeholders and stay afloat in the market ( George et al., 2019 ). It is the result of the actions or activities carried out by members of an organization to determine how successfully the group has achieved its goals. According to Lee et al. (2022) , organizational performance is a multidimensional construct. Different performance characteristics enable a balanced and comprehensive assessment of an organization's performance ( Hanaysha et al., 2022 ). Organizational success requires integrating systems, operations, people, customers, partners, and management. It is positively related to the ability of KM to produce a competitive advantage ( Latilla et al., 2018 ). Obeso et al. (2020) provide the three "value disciplines," or strategic performance skills for competitive advantage. Gupta and Chopra (2018) identify the influence of KM resources on organizational performance.

New product development (NPD) initiatives are sophisticated business procedures that include people from areas of design, testing, manufacturing, and marketing ( Awan et al., 2018 ; Cooper, 2019 ). For some years, researchers have argued that project failures are partly caused by a lack of a systematic approach to these complex initiatives and have advocated for the adoption of formal process models to aid management decision-making ( Galli et al., 2018 ). An organization must decide the most critical initiatives to pursue and determine a time estimate and implementation sequence . KM enables this using the organization's expertise, including customer, product, market, process, financial, and personal services knowledge ( Haider & Kayani, 2020 ).

An NPD strategy is an information-processing approach that integrates a larger body of knowledge to achieve its objectives. This integration refers to an organization's blend of external and internal knowledge. NPD improves if the integration is good. The efficacy of knowledge management techniques plays a critical part in NPD strategy implementation; organizations that use appropriate knowledge management methods perform better. Organizations are likely to impress NPD performance if they adapt to the changes in the external environment faster than their competitors ( Cui et al., 2019 ), stimulating product research & development (R&D).

Project teams with high levels of shared knowledge in terms of customers, suppliers, and internal capabilities tend to outperform those with low levels of shared knowledge in process performance. Minimizing the impact of hurdles to knowledge exchange in a product development environment is also desirable. Yildirmaz et al. (2018) maintain that knowledge lifecycle management promotes effective information exchange within organizations, particularly project teams. According to Mohammadi Moghadam et al. (2018) , the essence of NPD is the production and use of new knowledge to address organizational problems and introduce new goods to the market. At the same time, an organization's capacity to manage its NPD processes is critical to its long-term viability. Benabdellah et al. (2021) emphasize that project accomplishment comes from practical knowledge-sharing among project team members. Project teams increase cooperation across a project lifecycle through socialization ( Stock et al., 2021 ). They can improve their knowledge-sharing expertise and skillsets over the project lifecycle. Employees use socialization to trade personal or specialized knowledge. Ball et al. (2022) support this by claiming that executives learn tacit knowledge through observation, imitation, and practice in a social setting.

This study involves a bibliometric analysis of current KM research ( Akhavan et al., 2016 ). Two (2) databases take centerstage - Scopus and Web of Science (WoS), ensuring that only high-quality articles are included. They contain the “Emerging Sources Citation Index”, “Social Sciences Citation Index”, “Science Citation Index Expanded”, “Science Citation Index”, and "CPCI-SSH". The time frame for the investigation is 2000–2022. The bibliometric approach is used to analyze and acquire data ( Gupta & Bhattacharya, 2004 ; Moed et al., 2014 ). Scopus and WoS have the most extensive repositories of peer-reviewed social sciences research and are widely used in empirical and quantitative studies ( Li et al., 2017 ). The contribution of authors, countries, the number of publications, and the number of citations of a topic are all quantified by bibliometric research, as indicated in the literature ( Kalantari et al., 2017 ).

KM keywords are combined using Boolean operators (i.e., AND, OR) to find relevant articles. The term "knowledge management" as a keyword returned 18,078 results. In addition, 73 unique keywords commonly used in the titles of articles emerged in the first sample, closely connected to the KM stream. A narrowed search of this comprehensive list of terms (knowledge management OR new product development OR organizational outcomes OR individual outcomes OR project outcomes) yielded 25,622 articles.

Two programs, the VOS Viewer Version 1.6.18 and the R Software Version 4.2.2, support this study. The VOS Viewer conducts network analysis and displays the findings in a graphical format, identifying the networks of author collaborations and the links between KM themes in this case. The investigation is developed in R, a computer language for statistical analyses ( Derviş, 2019 ), and visualized using the VOS Viewer ( Van Eck & Waltman, 2017 ). The search terms are closely associated with the purpose, scope, gap, and research questions to be addressed, representing the inclusion criteria. Also, only articles published in the English language are selected. The search involves research articles, book chapters, and conference papers published between 2000 and 2022. Fig. 1 provides the article selection summary.

Article selection summary.

The VOS Viewer maps the bibliographic materials into a graphical representation by using specified input data ( Al-Ashmori, Othman and Rahmawati (2020) ; Williams (2020) . The data are analyzed using various bibliometric methods, including BC, co-citation, and co-occurrence of the author's keywords. When two (2) authors, "A" and "B", quote a third author's document, "C", the citation is referred to as BC. When a document references two (2) publications, this is referred to as co-citation, as when publications A and B are mentioned by research C. Additionally, the co-occurrence of keywords is calculated by calculating the number of times a term appears in the same article. Table 1 presents the keywords, queries, and number of documents.

Keywords, queries, and number of documents

Table 1 presents the keywords, i.e., knowledge management OR new product development, knowledge management OR organizational outcomes, knowledge management OR individual outcomes, knowledge management OR project outcomes, knowledge management OR new product development OR organizational outcomes OR individual outcomes OR project outcomes. Despite an increasing publication trend among policymakers and scholars in developing countries on KM, more studies are needed.

Fig. 2 shows the research publication trend in “knowledge management”. The study begins with the year 2000, observing an increasing trend in publications yearly, with 28,548 publications cited 49,6339 times.

Knowledge management publications based on country.

Fig. 2 displays the annual output for the top twenty (20) countries producing the most KM publications, the selection minimum being 5. One hundred and thirty-four (134) countries produced KM-related publications, with 107 countries meeting the threshold. Table 2 demonstrates that the United States has the highest number of publications by a developed country (5084), while the United Kingdom ranks second with 2442 publications and China third with 1501 publications. More importantly, Table 2 displays the surging interest of policymakers and researchers in KM.

Publication trend based on country

As shown in Table 3 , the maximum number of KM-related publications in 2022 is 1939. From 2000 to 2005, there was no publication related to KM. However, the yearly growth rate of KM publications exceeded four (4) times, from 384 articles in 2006 to 1939 articles in 2022. This progression shows considerable growth in KM research from an NPD perspective. KM data was taken until 10 December 2022.

Publication trend based on number of citations, publications, and year

Table 4 shows the fourteen (14) journals that had the maximum number of KM-related publications between 2005 and 2022. The highest number of publications came from the Journal of Knowledge Management (916 publications, 40,733 citations) and Knowledge Management Research & Practice (360 publications, 5826 citations). Most journals were from Scopus (SSCI, SCIE, and ESCI-indexed). This study's results reveal that most publications were on KM practices, organizational culture, leadership behavior, and performance.

Number of publications based on journals

Thirty-seven thousand nine hundred and eighteen (37,918) authors produced 28,548 publications on Knowledge Management. Based on the number of publications, citations received, number of publications, H-index, and institutional affiliation, the fourteen (14) most prolific authors are shown in Table 5 . The maximum number of publications was by Ye Li and Ying Wang.

Number of publications and citations based on authors

Table 6 shows the institutions that contributed the most to the growth of KM research. A country's citation count is based on the institutional affiliations given on the publications. Therefore, institutions in the United States of America, the United Kingdom, and China are the most significant contributors. Asian institutions made a small but considerable contribution, primarily through China, India, and Malaysia. Based on the number of publications, the institution's ranking is shown in Table 5 . The Islamic Azad University and The Hong Kong Polytechnic University achieved 160 publications. These two (2) institutions are among the most influential in KM research. The top 25 universities in the world based on publications comprise universities in the United States of America, the United Kingdom, and China.

Number of publications and citations based on institutions

As seen in Fig. 3 , items are identified by label and node. The sizes of each item's label and node are determined by the item's weight (importance). Furthermore, the distances between different keywords, and their placement and relatedness to other topics, show their connections in the bibliographic network map. Based on the bibliometric analysis, several variables relate to knowledge management and are marked by large letters. It indicates research that examines the variables’ effect or relationship with KM. There are five (5) primary subjects related to KM: new product development (464 frequency), innovation (280 frequency), project management (218 frequency), knowledge transfer/sharing (145 frequency), and organizational learning (116 frequency).

Trending Keywords used from (2000–2022).

This study uses bibliometric analysis to thoroughly assess the existing literature on KM, NPD, organizational outcomes, individual outcomes, and project outcomes in SMEs to identify antecedents, consequences, and future research paths, aiding in the development of a conceptual map. It is likely the first work that uses a systematic methodology and a bibliometric approach to investigate KM and NDP in SMEs. The literature is analyzed using (1) “textual analysis”, identifying emerging research hotspots and keywords such as organizational outcomes, individual outcomes, and project outcomes as critical success factors for effective KM and NDP in SMEs; (2) “co-citation analysis” of references, identifying the theoretical foundations of knowledge as a competitive advantage through KM and NDP; and (3) “bibliographic coupling analysis” of documents, revealing the antecedents.

The generated concept map may aid practitioners in comprehending the distinct roles of KM and NDP in the specific context of SMEs, particularly in terms of organizational, individual, and project performance development ( Haider and Kayani, 2020 ). The results indicate the following. First, KM and NDP benefit SMEs with organizational learning, improved customer interaction, innovations, increased profit, enhanced operational processes, and faster decision-making. Second, innovation, trust, and performance are highlighted as crucial human elements in SMEs associated with KM and NDP. Third, human resource management research can contribute to KM and NDP in the SME domain by examining KM and NDP-based practices, establishing a link between the emergence of innovation and innovative behaviors, and gaining a better understanding of strategies for the long-term storage and retrieval of tacit and explicit knowledge, or organizational memory.

This study's systematic review of the literature has identified clear directions for future research in the following areas: governance structure, human resource management support, knowledge-sharing practices, managerial decisions, types of tools and sharing mechanisms, type and complexity of knowledge, organizational outcomes, individual outcomes, project outcomes, and SMEs’ size and sector. Numerous inquiry domains are concerned with the fundamental human challenges and functions, moving away from the technical emphasis of KM and NDP.

This study's bibliometric analysis indicates that HRM research has the potential to advance understanding of SMEs’ behaviors related to KM and NDP in three specific areas: (1) understanding KM and NDP-based practices; (2) connecting the emergence of innovation and innovative behaviors to these practices to organizational, individual and project outcomes; and (3) contributing to a better understanding of strategies for long-term storage and retrieval of tacit and explicit knowledge. To begin, HRM researchers can examine KM practices, tools, and mechanisms to design SME studies that clarify the interplay and impact on an employee's KM and NDP behavior, to support the employee and facilitate knowledge management and sharing in succession planning. Conceptually, a strategy-as-practice perspective may facilitate the adoption of everyday practices and a better understanding of how SME employees execute knowledge management and sharing in their local settings.

Second, the results establish a stronger relationship between KM and NDP to innovation in the context of SMEs. However, further study is necessary to understand how KM contributes to practical innovation in NPD. Although it is well established that KM implementation is necessary for an SME's innovation capabilities, more understanding is needed to manage this implementation. Future studies can examine how information technology and digitalization enhance SMEs’ KM and NPD, leading to innovation as organizational, individual, and project outcomes. SME preferences for knowledge management through online or face-to-face channels should be investigated, along with the digital capabilities required to learn new information and apply innovation.

Third, there needs to be a better understanding of how SMEs acquire and preserve knowledge and more studies on organizational memory in SMEs. HRM scholars can investigate its strategic importance and how tacit and explicit knowledge can be proactively acquired, stored, and retrieved to help SMEs in the long run.

This study comes with certain limitations. For instance, bibliometric analysis is one of many literature review methods. Systematic literature review (SLR), interpretative techniques, and narrative approaches may also be used. However, bibliometrics provides a more scientific synthesis of a topic using several sources through the dimension database. According to Walsh & Renaud (2017) , bibliometric approaches need markers to quantify the amount, quality, and relationships between publications, obscuring emerging ideas in a study area. Thus, this study's strategy to circumvent this constraint may serve as a model for future KM-related advancement using bibliometric analysis. Nonetheless, this study of keyword co-occurrence, abstracts, and titles may include some bias. The sample consists only of journal articles and conference papers, book chapters with no special issues were included. Because the VOS Viewer uses a fractional counting approach to restrict journal citations, alternative applications such as Histcite, Pajek, or SCiMat may analyze data differently to provide various viewpoints.

Future research may use a constructive categorization strategy to highlight emerging research trends in knowledge systems. A mix of direct citation and BCA-D analysis may be beneficial. By choosing and synthesizing abstracts, the selected approach may omit certain insights that can be gained from full-text analysis. Future scholars can continue by coding and analyzing whole manuscripts. Despite these limitations, this work significantly contributes to the growing knowledge of KM and NPD related to organizational, individual, and project outcomes in SMEs.

This study was supported by grants from National Natural Science Foundation of China (72171197), the Natural Science Foundation of Sichuan Province of China (23NSFSC0795).

• Subscribe to our newsletter
• Identification of the drivers of and barriers to COVID-19 vaccine intake behavior using a mixed-method design: implications from a developing country
• Does smart city pilot policy reduce CO 2 emissions from industrial firms? Insights from China
• Factors affecting students' career choice in economics majors in the COVID-19 post-pandemic period: A case study of a private university in Vietnam
• Travel intention determinants during COVID-19: The role of trust in government performance
• Send to a friend
• Export reference
• Call for papers
• Instructions for authors
• Submit an article
• Ethics in publishing
• Diversity pledge
• Open Access
• Last published articles
• Current Issue
• Special issues & Supl.
• Aims and scope
• Editorial Board
• Advertising
• Most often read
• All metrics
• Artículos más leídos
• Colecciones
• Fondo editorial
• Más información
• Download PDF

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Understanding Knowledge Management: a literature review

by teng luo

Free Related PDFs

Dr Suraj Kumar Mukti

2020, International Journal of Knowledge Management

Over of the past several years, there have been rigorous discussions about the significance of knowledge management (KM) within the organization and the society. The management of knowledge is endorsed as a significant and essential factor for organizational existence and maintenance of ambitious strength. This article provides an in-depth knowledge of factors affecting KM. Literatures from 1992 to 2018 are covered in this article, 169 research papers have been explored which are related to classification of knowledge, factors affecting KM, KM tools and its planning & application. Various frameworks related to the successful implementation of KM and KM implementation tools proposed by previous authors are presented in this research article. KM is defined, classification of KM is presented, factors affecting KM are shown and its implementation strategies & tools are elucidated in available literatures in discrete manner.

Madihah Salwa

The rapid development of science and technology today, making organizational management to face challenges and keep innovating. One of the areas in management field that develops in its implementation is knowledge management. In this paper, we will describe the knowledge management which includes history, concept, and process. Understanding knowledge management can be concluded as the management of intellectual property owned by members of the organization and will be utilized for achieving competitive advantage for the organization. The principal process that will be the conclusion in this article is creating knowledge, processes knowledge, distributing knowledge, and using knowledge.

maryam hassanzadeh

Prof. Peyman Akhavan

MOHIT MAHESHWARKAR

2014, Management Science Letters

john mwangi

Hamad Bin Malik

Knowledge management (KM) is one of the newest topics in the present day, and many parts of the business sector have a growing interest in adopting this concept. There are great debates about the concept of KM and its frameworks in organizations. This paper presents a literature review of the notion of knowledge management in the institutional environment. First, it discusses the various definitions of knowledge management. Then, it follows with an overview of knowledge management background. Finally, it highlights the great debates of knowledge management in some conceptual foundations and authors evaluations, including tacit and explicit knowledge.

Ushe Makambe

This paper is a study of theoretical perspectives on knowledge and Knowledge Management. Business organisations in the 21 st century need effective Knowledge Management practices in order to enhance the performance and growth of their businesses and ensure long-term sustainability and competitive advantage. An understanding and appreciation of knowledge as a strategic resource is critical for organisational decision-makers so that they can take Knowledge Management more seriously. This paper outlines the views of Knowledge Management experts on what knowledge is and what it is not. It distinguishes data, information, and knowledge and explains their link. The paper also highlights alternative views of knowledge and discusses the different types of knowledge. It then espouses on the Knowledge Management processes of discovery, capture, sharing, and application. Keywords: Knowledge, Knowledge Management, knowledge discovery, knowledge capture, knowledge sharing, knowledge application

Recent years have witnessed a growing interest on the part of the business sector to adopt the notion of knowledge management (KM), and it has become a very important and influential factor in the success or failure of an organization. As a result, the literature about this management concept has grown in its quantity and quality. According to Magd and Hamza (2012), basic economic resources are comprised not only of capital, or natural resources, or workers, but also of knowledge, which will be the main engine of activities leading to wealth and the production of new projects; hence, many researchers have studied the principles of knowledge management and the ways to implement them within organizations. This paper explains some principles of knowledge management. First, it presents several definitions of the term ‘principle.’ Then, it highlights the background of knowledge management. Finally, it discusses three principles of knowledge management: the expensive of knowledge management (unintelligent concept), the importance of managers, and the fact that improving knowledge means sharing.

FREE RELATED PAPERS

Mostafa Emami

2012, Australian Journal of Business and Management …

Karl M Wiig

2000, Knowledge Horizons

Lakshmi Iyer

2000, Industrial Management and Data Systems

Leaders of successful organizations are consistently searching for better ways to improve performance and results. Frequent disappointments with past management initiatives have motivated managers to gain new understandings into the underlying, but complex mechanisms - such as knowledge - which govern an enterprise's effectiveness. Knowledge Management, Jar from being a management 'fad', is broad, multi-dimensional and covers most aspects of the enterprise's activities. To be competitive and successful, experience shows that enterprises must create and sustain a balanced intellectual capital portfolio. They need to set broad priorities and integrate the goals of managing intellectual capital and the corresponding effective knowledge processes. This requires systematic Knowledge Management. With knowledge as the major driving force behind the 'economics of ideas', we can expect that the emphasis on knowledge creation, development, organization and leverage will continue to be the prime focus for improving society.

Dr Mostafa Jafari

Yogesh Dwivedi

Abstract The aim of this research-in-progress paper is to provide a comprehensive and systematic review of the literature relating to knowledge management issues in order to establish the current “state of play” in the domain along a number of dimensions including unit of analysis, research paradigm employed, and the research topics/issues investigated.

Jafar Tanha

Babita Gupta

Knowledge Management (KM) is an emerging new tool for harnessing an organization&#39;s largely untapped resource Knowledge. KM is a process that includes the development, storage, retrieval, and dissemination of information and expertise, explicit as well as tacit, within the organization to support and improve an organization&#39;s business performance. There are as many techniques to implement KM, as there are definitions of KM. Knowledge Management requires a major shift in organizational culture and a commitment at all levels of a firm to make it work. This paper explores what Knowledge Management is, the links between KM and innovation, the imperatives for KM, and technological tools for KM implementation in an organization.

Nurudeen Alabi

The purpose of the paper is to chronicle the depth and breadth of applied knowledge management definitions penned by researchers and practitioners alike. Once these definitions are part of the body of knowledge they become accessible to academics conducting research, to organizations considering knowledge management, and to other interested parties who wish to learn more about the subject. All of the definitions are freely available from open access sources. Collectively the definitions represent the thoughts of authors in at least 13 countries and from 23 domains. The collection of definitions highlight the truly multidisciplinary nature of knowledge management. The initial analysis revealed the four most common verbs were use, create, share, and manage. The most common nouns were knowledge, process, organization, and information.) we deliberately did not include a definition for knowledge management. At the time, we believed the tools, techniques, and tactics for creating and exchanging organizational knowledge were much more important than the labels. Since the book's publication we have had the privilege of sharing our findings with hundreds of managers from dozens of organizations. Over the years we have learned that many managers want or perhaps even need a definition. We decided it is not for us to question their motive, but rather to help these managers in their quest. The genesis of this project was a web-based list of definitions; however, we believe a necessary evolution is the publication of a more formal list in a journal. We hope others will add to the compendium and take on value-added tasks of analyzing the collections.

Izabella Warner

This paper provides an introduction to the process of of creating a knowledge management system for a small to medium organisation. It looks at a range of strategies and policies which can be used to help capture, transfer, share and create knowledge. This paper accepts the contingency view of knowledge management and recognises that different approaches to knowledge management are not mutually exclusive and no one approach is instinctively preferable to another. When improving KM or implementing a new system, one must consider the characteristics of the existing KM infrastructure and establish policies and strategies aimed at addressing current, and sustaining future knowledge needs of the organisation necessary to achieve its strategic vision.

Khaleel Malik

2007, R&D Management

william E . carnes

2002, Human Factors and Power Plants, 2002. …

Paul Quintas

1997, Long Range Planning

Ebrahim Mansour

Evidently, there is a strong competition among organizations and rapid changes in business surroundings. Therefore, the organizations start thinking of developing their performance and processes. In this regard, Knowledge Management (KM) processes have turned out nowadays to become an organization strategic resource to the extent in which KM is viewed as a base of success or failure. The aim of this paper is presenting a conceptual KM process framework. It mainly emphasizes on developing phases such as knowledge infrastructure, knowledge combination, knowledge filtering, knowledge repository, knowledge sharing, knowledge application, and finally, knowledge performance across the KM process. The paper describes a more valid process to Improving Knowledge Performance.

AJTM Journal

The Asian Journal of Technology Management (AJTM), Vol 1 No 1 2014

Knowledge management (KM) is one of the leading approaches used for organizationalimprovement in which a range of specific processes and practices for identifying, capturing,acquiring, organizing and preserving knowledge and for making it available for transfer, sharingand reuse across the organization are being used. KM can help research and development (R&D)organization to intensify innovation by using information and communication technology (ICT) tofacilitate the knowledge flow. Even though KM is a new management paradigm in MINT, the KMstructure, policy, objectives, strategies and initiatives has been established. However implementationrate is rather slow and the impact of KM initiatives is not readily felt. This paper has identified andcompared KM case studies. These are analysed and assessed based on their challenges, strategiesand lesson learnt from an ICT perspective. The analysis and assessment of the case studies is used todevelop action plans to improve MINT KM implementation. The result of this analysis andassessment will be proposed as MINT KM solution in the future. Keywords: knowledge management, knowledge management process framework, knowledge creationspiral model, knowledge management life cycle, knowledge management processes cycle

Rodrigo Alberto Espinoza Gonzalez

2014, Journal of technology management &amp; innovation

2018, Information Impact: Journal of Information and Knowledge Management

Meltem Mutlutürk

2017, Business & Management Studies: An International Journal

As a young and interdisciplinary field, Knowledge Management (KM) holds a crucial role in scientific research and development of knowledge-intensive economies. This study elaborates on the methods used in previous studies regarding the research trends of KM and their contribution to the discipline by examining the KM literature. The purpose of the study is to determine the current research trends of KM by analysing KM citation classics and examining their characteristics as well as presenting a holistic framework of KM publications from the results of citation analysis. A total of 152 articles published in peer review journals between the years 2010-2014 were analysed. As a result of the analysis, a holistic KM framework was developed in order to contribute to a consensus of KM field. The results of the study reveals that the coverage of KM articles expanded into a broad spectrum of concepts, disciplines and environment.

mesovelia prima guna

Elayne Coakes

Communications of the Association for Information …

Dr. Kamran Yeganegi ( PH.D.)

we are living not only in the new millennium, which is in the new age. In this period, various terms such as the post-industrial era of the Information Age, the third wave or the Knowledge Society are used to describe the current situation. Regardless of the terms, most scholars believe that one of the important issues raised in this period is the concept of knowledge management, a concept that has created excitement and contributed to a lot of debate and debate. KM is a rapidly evolving approach, and it pays great attention to the recent challenges of increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of business-centric processes, along with continuous innovation. The need for knowledge management based on the growth of the perceptions of the business community comes from the fact that knowledge in enterprise performance and access to sustainable competitive advantage is considered an important element (Davenport & Grover, 2001)[1] Often, technology-related books begin with a number of definitions, but the definition of knowledge management is not easy. Different authors from various perspectives, with different approaches and motivations, have defined the knowledge management. Often, knowledge management is generally defined and defined as any organization needs to have its own way of doing its tasks and activities. This definition of knowledge management includes formal knowledge, rules of programs and procedures, and intangible technical knowledge, skills, and experiences of individuals. Also, the high definition of KM involves the way organizations work, communication, position analysis, the presentation of new solutions for issues, and the development of new business practices. In addition, the above definition includes cultural, ethnic, and values and relations with suppliers and customers as well. Knowledge management includes all the ways in which an organization manages its own knowledge assets, including how to collect, store, transfer, use, update, and create knowledge (Wickramasinghe & Rubitz, 2007)[2]. The Knowledge Management Department of Texas defines knowledge management as follows: KM is the systematic and systematic process of discovering, selecting, organizing, tabling, and providing information that enhances the recognition of individuals in their area of interest.. KM helps organizations to gain insights from their experiences, and to focus their activities on storage and use of knowledge in order to be able to deal with problems, dynamic learning, strategic planning and decision making, from this knowledge. To take advantage of KM not only prevents the deterioration of intellectual and brain assets, but also continuously adds to this wealth. There are two comprehensive definitions of knowledge management: 1. Knowledge management is to achieve organizational goals by motivating knowledge workers and creating facilities for them according to the company's strategy, so that they can interpret data and information (using existing information, experience, skills, culture). Personality, personal characteristics, emotions, etc.) through the meaning of data and information. 2. KM is the explicit and systematic management of critical knowledge and processes for the creation, organization, dissemination, use and discovery of knowledge (Madhavm & Grover, 1998)[3]. 2. Knowledge management concepts Knowledge is always valuable to people. Strong and civilized cultures are often identified with their libraries. The great library of the Alexandria Museum, the British Library, etc., is the place where the knowledge of a civilization is gathered. Therefore, knowledge management is around us, which is still not widely used. We are all familiar with terms like the knowledge economy and knowledge workers. In previous periods, the key was the production of wealth, ownership and access to capital and natural resources; while today, the key to wealth is the amount of access to knowledge creation. So, a small college with new ideas can earn billions of dollars. Sometimes the felling of trees, the gold mine, or forging created wealth, now all sectors need the services to create wealth. Most corporations nowadays have realized that they were successful because of their work skills and experience, not because of the physical assets they possessed. In addition, they have realized that even if some of their products are left out of the world market, the passage of time and the change of the company's individuals is necessary (Wickramasinghe, 2005)[4].

adriana maria

2001, MIS quarterly

Journal of Computer Science IJCSIS , Chikezie K Nwagu

While knowledge management (KM) is becoming an established discipline with many applications and techniques, its adoption in health care has been challenging. Though, the health care sector relies heavily on knowledge and evidence based medicine is expected to be implemented in daily health care activities; besides, delivery of care replies on cooperation of several partners that need to exchange their knowledge in order to provide quality of care. This publication will give an overview of KM, its methods and techniques.

Mitt Nowshade Kabir

Knowledge management (KM) is going through a challenging time. Interest in knowledge management in the corporate world is waning across the board. According to a major consulting firm, for the first time since its inception as an important management tool in early 1990s KM has fallen out of management's priority list this year. It is one more reason why a number of academics are questioning the viability of KM as a worthy concept and its right to be an academic discipline. There are multiple issues that have facilitated the growing ambiguity around the concept. First, ever since the concept emerged, some members of KM community have opposed the name knowledge management. According to this group, this moniker is a misnomer and an oxymoron. They consider that knowledge cannot be managed hence the name does not make any sense. Their rational is as, often, subject name embodies and exemplifies what the subject is about it creates considerable opacity in the understanding of the true nature of the notion. Second, the concept of knowledge management evolved from the idea of information technology management. Technology is a key enabler and a pillar of knowledge management. However, undue focus on technology in the early stage of knowledge management has, in many cases, brought dubious results putting a damper on the enthusiastic sprouting of knowledge management use. Third, lack of proper theoretical and philosophical foundation bifurcated the concept in two ideologies: subjectivist and objectivist. Each of these views propagates its strategy and focuses on different priorities. Recent studies show that the KM initiative based on just one of the two strategies does not always produce desired outcome. Fourth, in today's evolving market, management concerns and needs are changing rapidly. Because of the superficial constraint internally imposed by KM as a discipline, it is failing to engulf new adjacent concepts as they emerge. Big data, for example, is a case in point. Grounding on the ideas taken from previously emerged new disciplines the author argues that the concept of knowledge management should be augmented and renamed as "Knowledge Science." The domain of the new discipline, the paper suggests, should encompass all aspects of knowledge not just management of knowledge activities.

Lois Delcambre

2004, Knowledge, Technology & Policy

The authors are building a knowledge management system (KMS) for use by several U.S. federal agencies. Its use must harmonize with multiple agency and disciplinary cultures, and also link with the efforts of at least one international agency. In this paper, we present the KMS project’s technological contributions and implementation considerations as a case in knowledge management (KM). We link

Dr Maria L. Granados

2009, European and Mediterranean …

elham mohamed

2019, International Journal of Knowledge Management Studies

Epaminondas Koronis

Anjali Gulati

2003, Desidoc Journal of Library Information Technology

ABSTRACT Knowledge management describes the way in which organisations are attempting to capture, enhance, and use the knowledge necessary for their survival. In this paper, the author discusses about concept of knowledge management, contribution of ...

Marco Bettoni

We contend in this presentation that more sustainable and successful Knowledge Management (KM) solutions can be built by using the principles of Knowledge Engineering (KE) to understand knowledge in a more appropriate way. We will basically explore five aspects of practical knowledge relevant for promoting the essential Human Factors (HF) involved in KM tasks: the value and function of knowledge, the motor and mechanism of knowledge, the two states and 3 conversions of individual knowledge, the logic of experience (organisation of knowledge) and knowledge processes (wheel of knowledge). We explain their consequences under the form of five principles that we suggest could be used as leading criteria for designing and evaluating KM solutions and systems in a new way more appropriate for implementing successfully the old insight of the essential role of people.

Nitty Hirawaty Binti Kamarulzaman

Handbook of Research on Global Supply Chain Management

This chapter is a comprehensive investigative documentary on knowledge management (KM). It was extensively cover past researches done on knowledge management, exposing its varied dimensions to readers as well as guide the readers through its role in research, business, and daily life. The chapter was well discussed about knowledge, knowledge management and knowledge management systems. It also address the Nonaka&#39;s Knowledge Management Model or known as SECI modal in order the readers can understand the knowledge creation process.

Ana Vasconcelos

Purpose: This paper discusses some of the debates that have surrounded Knowledge Management as a field since its inception in 1990s from the perspective of the dilemmas that they have raised regarding: i) the notion of Knowledge Management as a field in relationship to other cognate fields such as Information Management; ii) the implications introduced by different approaches and perspectives on managing knowledge. Methodology/Approach: Problems and dilemmas brought about by the contribution of the following perspectives and strands of literature on Knowledge Management are discussed:- Organisational behaviour perspectives;- Strategic management perspectives;- Economic and accountancy based perspectives. Findings: The explicit aim attributed to Knowledge Management by many authors of managing the transfer of tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge raises dilemmas that are re-enacted and reconstructed in the above key approaches to Knowledge Management. Originality/value of paper: Be...

Harry Scarbrough

2001, Journal of Management Studies

Bhojaraju Gunjal

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2023