Chen, A.-P.; Chen, M.-Y.: ¬A review of survey research in knowledge management performance (2005)
0.00
0.002269176 = product of:
0.004538352 = sum of:
0.004538352 = product of:
0.009076704 = sum of:
0.009076704 = weight(_text_:a in 3025) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009076704 = score(doc=3025,freq=10.0), product of:
0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046056706 = queryNorm
0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 3025, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3025)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This paper surveys knowledge management (KM) development using a literature review and classification of articles from 1995 to 2004 with a keyword index and article abstract in order to explore how KM performance evaluation has developed during this period. Based on the scope of 76 articles from 78 academic journals of KM, this paper surveys and classifies KM measurements using the following eight categories: qualitative analysis, quantitative analysis, financial indicator analysis, non-financial indicator analysis, internal performance analysis, external performance analysis, project-oriented analysis, and organizational-oriented analysis together with their measurement matrices for different research and problem domains. Discussion is presented, indicating the followings future development directions for KM performance evaluation: (1) KM performance evaluation is getting more important. (2) The quantitative analysis is the primary methodology in KM performance evaluation. (3) Firms are now highlighting the KM performance of competitors, through benchmarking or best practices, rather than internally auditing KM performance via balanced scorecard. (4) Firms may begin to focus more on project management measurement, than on the entire organization.
- Type
- a
