Knowledge Management ('KM') comprises a range of practices used by organisations to identify, create, represent, and distribute knowledge for reuse, awareness and learning. It has been an established discipline since 1995 with a body of university courses and both professional and academic journals dedicated to it. Most large companies have resources dedicated to Knowledge Management, often as a part of 'Information Technology' or 'Human Resource Management' departments, and sometimes reporting directly to the head of the organisation. As effectively managing information is a must in any business, Knowledge Management is a multi-billion dollar world wide market.
Knowledge Management programs are typically tied to organisational objectives and are intended to achieve specific outcomes, such as shared intelligence, improved performance, competitive advantage, or higher levels of innovation.
One aspect of Knowledge Management, knowledge transfer, has always existed in one form or another. Examples include on-the-job peer discussions, formal apprenticeship, corporate libraries, professional training and mentoring programs. However, with computers becoming more widespread in the second half of the 20th century, specific adaptations of technology such as knowledge bases, expert systems, and knowledge repositories have been introduced to further simplify the process.
Knowledge Management programs attempt to manage the process of creation (or identification), accumulation and application of knowledge across an organisation. Knowledge Management, therefore, attempts to bring under one set of practices various strands of thought and practice relating to:
While Knowledge Management programs are closely related to Organizational Learning initiatives, Knowledge Management may be distinguished from Organisational Learning by a greater focus on specific knowledge assets and the development and cultivation of the channels through which knowledge flows.
The emergence of Knowledge Management has also generated new roles and responsibilities in organisations, an early example of which was the Chief Knowledge Officer. In recent years, Personal knowledge management (PKM) practice has arisen in which individuals apply KM practice to themselves, their roles and their career development.

intellectual capital and the knowledge worker in the knowledge economy
the idea of the learning organisation
various enabling organisational practices, such as Communities of Practice and corporate Yellow Page directories for accessing key personnel and expertise
various enabling technologies such as knowledge bases and expert systems, help desks, corporate intranets and extranets, Content Management, wikis and Document Management Schools of thought in Knowledge Management

Key concepts in Knowledge Management
A key distinction made by the majority of knowledge management practitioners is Nonaka's reformulation of Polanyi's distinction between tacit and explicit knowledge. The former is often subconscious, internalized, and the individual may or may not be aware of what he or she knows and how he or she accomplishes particular results. At the opposite end of the spectrum is conscious or explicit knowledge -- knowledge that the individual holds explicitly and consciously in mental focus, and may communicate to others. In the popular form of the distinction, tacit knowledge is what is in our heads, and explicit knowledge is what we have codified.
Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) argued that a successful KM program needs, on the one hand, to convert internalized tacit knowledge into explicit codified knowledge in order to share it, but, on the other hand, it also must permit individuals and groups to internalize and make personally meaningful codified knowledge they have retrieved from the KM system.
The focus upon codification and management of explicit knowledge has allowed knowledge management practitioners to appropriate prior work in information management, leading to the frequent accusation that knowledge management is simply a repackaged form of information management. (Eg Wilson, T.D. (2002) "The nonsense of 'knowledge management'" Information Research, 8(1), paper no. 144 [Available at http://InformationR.net/ir/8-1/paper144.html]
Critics have argued that Nonaka and Takeuchi's distinction between tacit and explicit knowledge is oversimplified and that the notion of explicit knowledge is self-contradictory. Specifically, for knowledge to be made explicit, it must be translated into information (i.e., symbols outside of our heads).
Another common framework for categorizing the dimensions of knowledge include embedded knowledge (knowledge which has been incorporated into an artifact of some type, for example an information system may have knowledge embedded into its design) and embodied knowledge (representing knowledge as learned capability of the body's nervous, chemical, and sensory systems). These two dimensions, while frequently used, are not universally accepted.
It is also common to distinguish between the creation of "new knowledge" (i.e., innovation) vs. the transfer of "established knowledge" within a group, organization, or community. Collaborative environments such as communities of practice or the use of social computing tools can be used for both creation and transfer.

Dimensions of knowledge
Knowledge may be accessed, or captured, at three stages: before, during, or after knowledge-related activities.
For example, individuals undertaking a new project for an organization might access information resources to learn best practices and lessons learned for similar projects undertaken previously, access relevant information again during the project implementation to seek advice on issues encountered, and access relevant information afterwards for advice on after-project actions and review activities. Knowledge management practitioners offer systems, repositories, and corporate processes to encourage and formalize these activities.
Similarly, knowledge may be captured and recorded before the project implementation, for example as the project team learns lessons during the initial project analysis. Similarly, lessons learned during the project operation may be recorded, and after-action reviews may lead to further insights and lessons being recorded for future access.
Different organizations have tried various knowledge capture incentives, including making content submission mandatory and incorporating rewards into performance measurement plans. There is controversy over whether incentives work or not in this field and no firm consensus has emerged.

Knowledge capture stages
One alternative strategy to encoding knowledge into and retrieving knowledge from a knowledge repository such as a database, is for individuals to make knowledge requests of subject matter experts on an ad hoc basis. A key benefit of this strategy is that the response from the expert individual is rich in content and contextualized to the particular problem being addressed and personalized to the particular person or people addressing it. The downside of this strategy is that it is tied to the availability and memory recall skill of specific individuals in the organization. It does not capture their insights and experience for future use should they leave or become unavailable, and also does not help in the case when particular technical issues or problems previously faced change with time to the point where a new synthesis is required, the experts' memories being out of date. The emergence of narrative approaches to knowledge management attempts to provide a bridge between the formal and the ad hoc, by allowing knowledge to be held in the form of stories.

Ad hoc knowledge access
There are a number of claims as to 'drivers', or motivations, leading to organizations undertaking a knowledge management program.
Perhaps first among these is to gain the competitive advantage (in industry) and/or increased effectiveness that comes with improved or faster learning and new knowledge creation. Knowledge management programs may lead to greater innovation, better customer experiences, consistency in good practices and knowledge access across a global organization, as well as many other benefits, and knowledge management programs may be driven with these goals in mind. Government represents a highly active area, for example DiploFoundation Conference on Knowledge and Diplomacy (1999) outlines the range of specific KM tools and techniques applied in diplomacy.
Considerations driving a Knowledge Management program might include:

making available increased knowledge content in the development and provision of products and services
achieving shorter new product development cycles
facilitating and managing organizational innovation and learning
leverage the expertise of people across the organization
benefiting from 'network effects' as the number of productive connections between employees in the organization increases and the quality of information shared increases, leading to greater employee and team satisfaction
managing the proliferation of data and information in complex business environments and allowing employees rapidly to access useful and relevant knowledge resources and best practice guidelines
managing intellectual capital and intellectual assets in the workforce (such as the expertise and know-how possessed by key individuals) as individuals retire and new workers are hired Drivers of Knowledge Management
The early Knowledge Management technologies were online corporate yellow pages (expertise locators) and document management systems. Combined with the early development of collaborative technologies (in particular Lotus Notes), KM technologies expanded in the mid 1990s. Subsequently it followed developments in technology in use in Information Management. In particular the use of semantic technologies for search and retrieval and the development of knowledge management specific tools such as those for communities of practice.
More recently social computing tools (such as blogs and wikis) have developed to provide a more unstructured approach to knowledge transfer and knowledge creation through the development of new forms of community. However, such tools for the most part are still based on text, and thus represent explicit knowledge transfer. These tools face challenges distilling meaningful re-usable knowledge from their content.
Knowledge mapping is commonly used to cover functions such as a knowledge audit (discovering what knowledge exists at the start of a knowledge management project), a network survey (Mapping the relationships between communities involved in knowledge creation and sharing) and creating a map of the relationship of knowledge assets to core business process. Although frequently carried out at the start of a Knowledge Management programme, it is not a necessary pre-condition or confined to start up.

Knowledge Management Technologies
Historically, there have been a number of technologies 'enabling' or facilitating knowledge management practices in the organization, including expert systems, knowledge bases, various types of Information Management, software help desk tools, document management systems and other IT systems supporting organizational knowledge flows.
The advent of the Internet brought with it further enabling technologies, including e-learning, web conferencing, collaborative software, content management systems, corporate 'Yellow pages' directories, email lists, wikis, blogs, and other technologies. Each enabling technology can expand the level of inquiry available to an employee, while providing a platform to achieve specific goals or actions. The practice of KM will continue to evolve with the growth of collaboration applications, visual tools and other technologies. Since its adoption by the mainstream population and business community, the Internet has led to an increase in creative collaboration, learning and research, e-commerce, and instant information.
There are also a variety of organisational enablers for knowledge management programs, including Communities of Practice, before-, after- and during- action reviews (see After Action Review), peer assists, information taxonomies, coaching and mentoring, and so on.
Another aspect would be the creation of an incentive-system not only to provide the organisation with knowledge but also to manage and handle ideas of staff.

Knowledge Management enablers
Knowledge management activities may be centralized in a Knowledge Management Office, or responsibility for knowledge management may be located in existing departmental functions, such as the Human Resource (to manage intellectual capital) or IT departments (for content management, social computing etc.). Different departments and functions may have a knowledge management function and those functions may not be connected other than informally.

Knowledge Management roles and organizational structure
Knowledge Management professionals may use a specific lexicon in order to articulate and discuss the various issues arising in Knowledge Management. For example, terms such as intellectual capital, metric, and tacit vs explicit knowledge typically form an indispensable part of the knowledge management professional's vocabulary.

Knowledge Management lexicon
There is no established evidence as to the reasons behind failure and success of Knowledge Management initiatives in organizations. Some argue that a failure to sustain investment is one factor, but it can equally be argued that if knowledge management delivered on its promises investment would continue. As with many management initiatives, particularly those with a heavy IT basis (as is the case in Knowledge Management), frequent questions are raised about the level of consultation necessary before a program is started; these questions are linked to issues of cultural change and a willingness to share and collaborate with colleagues There is no evidence that Knowledge Management, in all these respects, is any different from other management initiatives.

Knowledge Management Reasons of Failure or Success

Intellectual capital - the intangible assets of a company which contribute to its valuation.
Chief Knowledge Officer - an executive responsible for maximizing the knowledge potential of an organization.
Knowledge - that which can be acted upon.
Personal knowledge management - the organization of an individual's thoughts and beliefs. Related definitions

Terminology extraction
Battle Command Knowledge System
Community of practice
Competitive intelligence
Complexity theory and organizations
Computer-supported collaboration
Corporate memory
e-learning
Enterprise content management
Enterprise search
Enterprise social software
Expert system
Intellectual Capital
Knowledge
Knowledge Ecosystems
Knowledge base
Knowledge management for development
KM concepts
KM Journals
Knowledge Management System
Knowledge representation
Knowledge transfer
Knowledge visualization
Meta-knowledge
Morphological analysis
Organizational learning
Organizational empowerment
Personal knowledge management
Public sector knowledge management
Procedural knowledge
Self service software
Sensemaking
Semantic Web
Social network
Skills management
Tacit knowledge & Explicit knowledge
Value network
Value network analysis Further reading

Alavi, M. and Leidner, D. (2001). "Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues," MIS Quarterly, 25, 1, 107-136.
Applen, J.D. (2002). "Technical Communication, Knowledge Management, and XML." Technical Communication. Arlington, VA. Volume 49. Number 3. pp. 301-13.
Bellenger, Gene (2002) "Emerging Perspectives", Systems Thinking Knowledge Management - Emerging Perspectives
Bontis, N., Dragonetti, N., Jacobsen, K. and G. Roos. (1999) "The Knowledge Toolbox: A review of the tools available to measure and manage intangible resources", European Management Journal, 17, 4, 391-402.
Bontis, N. (1999). "Managing Organizational Knowledge by Diagnosing Intellectual Capital: Framing and advancing the state of the field", International Journal of Technology Management,18, 5/6/7/8, 433-462.
Bontis, N. (2002). "The rising star of the Chief Knowledge Officer", Ivey Business Journal, March/April, 20-25.
Bray, D. (2007). "Literature Review - Knowledge Management Research at the Organizational Level", Social Science Research Network.
Cross, R., Parker, A., Prusak, L. and Borgatti, S.P. (2001), "Knowing what we know: supporting knowledge creation and sharing in social networks", Organizational Dynamics Vol 30, No 2, pp. 100-120.
Ekbia, H. and Hara, N. (2004) The Quality of Evidence in Knowledge Management Literature: the Guru Version. At http://www.slis.indiana.edu/research/working_papers/files/SLISWP-04-01.pdf
Hamburg, Terstriep & Rehfeld (2006 Nov), "Knowledge-Based Services for Economic Agencies based on Internet Technologies",Icfai Journal of Knowledge Management, Icfai University Press. Article available on SSRN
Hansen, M. R., N. Nohria and T. Tierney (1999). 'What's your strategy for managing knowledge?' Harvard Business Review (March-April).
Huijsen, W., Driessen, S. J. and Jacobs, J. W. M. (2004a), "Explicit Conceptualizations for Knowledge Mapping", Sixth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS 2004), Vol 3, pp. 231-236, Porto, April 2004.
Knorr-Siedow, T. (2005) Knowledge management and enhanced policy application; in: Van Kempen, R. et alter: Restructuring large housing estates in Europe, Bristol, pp 321-341
Malhotra, Y (2005) "Integrating Knowledge Management Technologies in Organizational Business Processes: Getting Real Time Enterprises to Deliver Real Business Performance", Journal of Knowledge Management Vol . 9 no. 1 pp 7-28.
Malhotra, Y (2000) "Knowledge Management for E-Business Performance: Advancing Information Strategy to "Internet Time"", Information Strategy: The Executive's Journal Vol . 16 no. 4 pp 5-16.
Markus, M. (2001) "Toward a Theory of Knowledge Reuse: Types of Knowledge Reuse Situations and Factors in Reuse Success," Journal of Management Information Systems, 18, 1, 57-93. [1] Mudambi, R. (2002) "Knowledge management in multinational firms", Journal of International Management, 8, 1, 1-9. Nissen, M.E. (2006) "Dynamic Knowledge Patterns to Inform Design: A Field Study of Knowledge Stocks and Flows in an Extreme Organization," Journal of Management Information Systems, 22, 3, 225-263.
Powell, J and Swart, J (2005) "This is what the fuss is about"- a systemic modeling for organizational knowing , Journal of Knowledge Management Vol . 9 no. 2 pp 45-58
Powell, J and Swart, J (2005) "Men and Measures" - capturing knowledge requirement in firms through qualitative system modeling, Journal of Operational Research.
Serenko, A. and Bontis, Nick. (2004). "Meta-review of knowledge management and intellectual capital literature", Knowledge and Process Management, 11, 3, 185-198. [2]
Snowden, D J. "Complex Acts of Knowing: Paradox and Descriptive Self-Awareness." Journal of Knowledge Management, Special Issue 6, no. 2 (2002): 100-11. [3]
Swart, J (2006) "Intellectual Capital" : Disentangling an enigmatic concept, Journal of Intellectual Capital Vol 7 No 2 pp 136-159.
Thomas, J. C., Kellogg, W.A., and Erickson, T. (2001) The Knowledge Management puzzle: Human and social factors in knowledge management. IBM Systems Journal, 40(4), 863-884.
Vail III, E.F. (1999), "Mapping Organisational knowledge", Knowledge Management Review, Vol 8, May/June, pp. 10-15.
Wexler, M.N. (2001), "The who, what and why of knowledge mapping", Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol 5, No 3, pp. 249-263
Wilson, T.D. (2002) "The nonsense of 'knowledge management'" Information Research, 8(1), paper no. 144 [Available at http://InformationR.net/ir/8-1/paper144.html]