Introduction

In today’s dynamic business environment, knowledge management has become the key basis of
every organization. The closer examination and research reveals that many successful firms,
business and organizations are investing resources in this area. “Every organization has a firm
aspiration to grow and that by strategically giving though competition to its competitors, whether
local, national, or may be global. Such of an organization can be realized if it maximizes upon
creating and managing knowledge through tested organizational mechanisms”. (Sanjay Kumar
Singh.(2008) pp.3). Hence, as we move into knowledge society, knowledge will be the key
driver to developed nation, competitive advantage and to the communities and societies. (Fei
Gao et al, 2008, pp.3)

Why the importance of knowledge management getting more consideration to the organizations
and business, governments, Non-Governmental, international organization and financial
institution? The answer is for survival. The success of today’s global economy depends on fast
and efficient information exchange and distribution and intellectual capital. (Leila A.Halawi et al
2005, pp.75)

Hence, many researchers are venturing knowledge management tasks but concluded with
different findings, theories, limitation and implications. Most of them are conduct their research
and review in desire field. Some in the area of an evolutionary and perspective and others of
knowledge management wrote “there is a growing realization that technically and social
processes interact in complimentarities to shape knowledge management effort”. (Dorit Nevo,
Yolanda E. Chan, 2008, pp.585). However (Ragna Seidler-de Alwis and Evi Hartamann 2008,
pp.134) said knowledge described as dynamic in unified model of dynamic creation. It is created
in social interaction along with individuals and organizations. (Loye(Lynn) Ray, 2008) further
defined knowledge as a practice that valuable information and transfer into in any form of
knowledge that use for critical decision making.
As knowledge management gained recognition in the mid to late 1990s, many researchers and
practitioners have been approached knowledge management in different perspectives and the
same time leveraging future generation of knowledge. The purposed of this paper is to provide a

1
review of knowledge management literature based on the ten journals as per table 1 below by
and how each articles relates specifically in the area of value creation culture in knowledge
management perspective.

The proposed review of value creation culture is presented by adopting and extends KM
generation model in third generation KM. A true valuation creation culture is identified by
understand different perspectives of KM including the factors emerge. The topic reviewed and
explained the Knowledge management viewed from different perspectives and factors to
different perspectives of KM. Then the views will identify the first and second generation of
KM. Then adopt McElroy’s to nurture value creation culture in third generation of KM as a gap.
The paper also describes the relationship between KM and value creation and how the factors
emerge as essential conditions to facilitate knowledge value creation.

2
Teble 1: Ten articles - Journals

Paper Title Author(s) Journal(inclu Focus/Foci of paper Methodology/Approach Key findings/conclusions

ding year,
volume and
issues

Requirement Loye (Lynn) Vol.12 No.3 Steps business needs to General review on how to devise Provides information for
for knowledge Ray is at 2008, pp 156- establish a knowledge and implement a knowledge information source and
management: Towson 168 management methodology management system where simplifying data that need
Business University, and guiding principle for information is sorted by definition, to preserve the corporate
driving Towson, its implementation. business requirements, and information from
information Maryland, Implementations. knowledge employee and
technology USA centralized for retrieval.

An Chalee VOL. 12 NO. Explaining taxonomy of Holistic approach was taken from an The key finding not only
evolutionary Vorakulpipa 3 2008, pp. KM from Information interpretive stance of organization focus on migration of first
and t and Yacine 17-34, System perspective and KM and KMS system and models generation knowledge
interpretive Rezgui followed by KM System. from a range of KM research sharing to knowledge
perspective to Then its review of published in the academic and trade creating second generation
knowledge knowledge management literature. but also allow to create
management (KM) literature adapting sustainable organization
and extending McElroy’s and society values.
KM generation model.
The third generation KM in
the latter part has represent
key challenges faced by
competitive organization
and combine approach that
create number of
perspective to KM includes

3
Paper Title Author(s) Journal(inclu Focus/Foci of paper Methodology/Approach Key findings/conclusions
ding year,
volume and
issues
human networks, social
capital, intellectual capital,
technology assets, and
change processes.

Role of Sanjay VOL. 12 NO. The paper focusing on the The focus mainly on collection of The finding shows that
leadership in Kumar 4 2008, pp. 3- relationship and the impact quantitative data on leadership directive and supportive,
knowledge Singh 15, of leadership role on styles and knowledge management consulting and delegating
management: a ISSN 1367- Knowledge management practices by using two psychometric roles and style of
study 3270 practices in software firm. method , namely leadership are strongly
organizational leadership related to knowledge
questionnaire and knowledge management practices.
management assessment tool in one However, delegating mode
of the software firm in India. of leadership style was the
only one found is vitally
predicting creation of
knowledge competitive.

The role of Marina du VOL. 11 NO. Clarified the nature role of Methodology used was literature Globalization has become a
knowledge Plessis is 4 2007, pp. KM in innovation as an research and some personal significant factor due to the
management in based 20-29 enabler in identifying the experiences and interpretations. high speed innovation,
innovation at Lyttelton, ISSN 1367- complexity. It also spell of rapidly evolving
South 3270 the drivers for KM system technology, shorter product
Africa. for value proposition life cycle and higher
purpose. productivity. The

4
Paper Title Author(s) Journal(inclu Focus/Foci of paper Methodology/Approach Key findings/conclusions
ding year,
volume and
issues
innovation has become
basis in the organization
and its complexity has been
increased since the rapid
development on KM.

A holistic view Sajjad M. VOL. 12 NO. The research involves an Detail case study in knowledge Observation study to a
of knowledge Jasimuddin 2 2008, pp. in-depth case study of transfer strategies in a UK-based large high-tech firm, the
management is based at 57-66 knowledge transfer firms by data collection. The paper concludes that the
strategy the School ISSN 1367- strategies used in a UK- reviewed has developed a semi hybrid strategy recognizes
of 3270 based group within a high- structured instruments in KM the interplay falls between
Managemen tech global corporation literature. The data analysis soft and hard mechanism to
t and which was purposively procedure in the approach was knowledge transfer.
Business, selected for data collection. introduced by Mils and Huerman.
University A semi-structured
of Wales – instrument was developed
Aberystwyth based on the review of the
, knowledge management
Aberystwyth literature. The data analysis
, UK. procedure within the case
study employed in this
research was based on the
approach proposed by
Miles and Huberman.

A Delphi study Dorit Nevo Received 15 Empirically explored the Based on the collection of data using Shows that, supportive and
of knowledge a,*, Yolande August 2005; roles and scope of quantitative method on the directive negatively

5
Paper Title Author(s) Journal(inclu Focus/Foci of paper Methodology/Approach Key findings/conclusions
ding year,
volume and
issues
management E. Chan received in knowledge management leadership style and KM practices associate in KM practice.
systems: revised form systems in organizations. by using psychometric instruments Consulting and delegation
Scope and 25 January Building on a knowledge like organizational leadership style are positively related
requirements 2007; based view of the firm, we questionnaire and KM assessment to the organization. Finally
accepted 26 hypothesized and tools. delegating mode of
May 2007 empirically tested our leadership is creating
Available belief that more integration The survey done to 331 employees competitive advantage in
online 25 July is needed between in one of the software firm in India the software company.
2007 technologies intended to with one year working experience.
support knowledge and
those supporting business
operations.

The use of tacit Ragna VOL. 12 NO. Re-examine on the re- Approach is structured and examines Analyzed and highlight the
knowledge Seidler-de 1 2008, pp. examine on the usage of the usage of tacit knowledge by creating, availability and
within Alwis and 133-147 tacit knowledge in identifying key levers for tacit transferring tacit
innovative Evi ISSN 1367- innovative organization. knowledge and positive impact on knowledge within the
companies: Hartmann 3270 The research is addresses innovation process. organization. Many
knowledge the ways organization can companies are valued tacit
management in cultivate knowledge knowledge and gains
innovative sharing by comparing with competitive advantage and
enterprises available research on realized that its creating
explicit knowledge and huge of opportunities and
many organizations still potentials.
unexplored the usage of
tacit knowledge. It’s also
focusing on the implication
and significant, transfer of

6
Paper Title Author(s) Journal(inclu Focus/Foci of paper Methodology/Approach Key findings/conclusions
ding year,
volume and
issues
tacit knowledge, barriers of
transfer, success factor and
the improvements.

Knowledge, Fei Gao, VOL. 12 NO. Full understanding of the Presenting the paper through various Shows that, knowledge
management, Meng Li and 2 2008, pp. 3- nature, scope and the perspectives of knowledge, management not limited to
and knowledge Steve Clarke 17, methodologies of management and knowledge record and editing explicit
management in ISSN 1367- knowledge management to management. The paper explore the knowledge but the need to
business 3270 help managers grab the core of knowledge management in identify implicit that
operations knowledge. the organizations by using critical benefit and derived the
system thinking , process. A framework of
organizational knowledge
and its criteria shows show
the relationship between
static knowledge and
dynamic process
knowledge transforming
and creating innovative
process towards better
product and services in
organizational management
by using A systematic
methodologies and
theories.

7
Paper Title Author(s) Journal(inclu Focus/Foci of paper Methodology/Approach Key findings/conclusions
ding year,
volume and
issues
Knowledge Gashaw (2010), The key focus is to change Discuss on the members of IS Concluded that KM is a
Management: Kebede∗ doi:10.1016/j. perception of Knowledge profession group within the logical progression within
An information ijinfomgt.201 management professional knowledge hierarchy where its hierarchy framework.
science 0.02.004 to take more proactive and knowledge is the highest form The KM progression is an
perspective visible role in advancing manifestation on IS. The writer evolutionary and it’s
KM and development of considered KM as a logical understanding and
Information System. It’s framework. The logical progression management practices has
also aims to consent among will take as an object study as a been practiced from the
IS professional on natural and long waited development earlier stages and became
conceptualization, goals in IS and emphasis that IS the basis in current highest
and scope of KM in IS. profession is different manifestation stage. The IS professionals
at different times. viewed no difference
between IS and KM due to
the logical overlap among
the concept and tools
involved at an early stage
development.

Resource- Leila A. Volume 3 Focusing on knowledge The approach was conducted a Resource-Based View
1
Based View of Halawi , Jay Issue 2, pp management as a strategic systematic literature review as an Knowledge Management
Knowledge E. Aronson2 75-86 asset and competitive evidence based tool. The paper for Competitive Advantage
Management and Richard advantage to the firms. The reviewed resources based theory and research is creating tools to
for V. research emphasis on examined the KM practices and measure competitive
Competitive McCarthy3 Resources Based Model as create competitive advantage. advantage. The model has
Advantage based model, KM implication to the
generation and discussed researches and practitioners
the following aspect of especially in the area of

8
Paper Title Author(s) Journal(inclu Focus/Foci of paper Methodology/Approach Key findings/conclusions
ding year,
volume and
issues
KM: Knowledge relationship between KN
Management, Knowledge and competitive advantage.
Management System,
Resource based view of the
firm, Knowledge
Management in practice
and it’s implications

9
In reviewing the value creation in knowledge management perspective, many academic
communities categorized the KM in various view. According to Chalgee Vorakulpipat, Yachine
Rezgui, 2008) that knowledge can be viewed as follows:

1. State of mind perspective focusing on understanding or applied and developed through

experience and study.
2. Object perspective emphasized on stored knowledge and manipulate and process
concurrently to know the action
3. Process perspective related to application of exercise
4. Condition perspective focusing on information access
5. Capability perspective stress on the capability with potential for influencing future action

Similarly, knowledge also viewed broadly as explicit as well as tacit knowledge. According to
(Ragna Seidler-de Alwis, Evi Hartmann, 2008), described explicit knowledge is conventional
form which can find in any sources of information, expressed, shared, processed, transmitted and
stored. In contrast, tacit knowledge refers to the values, beliefs, ideas, understanding, emotion
and experience which are acquired by sharing within a group or individual. However, tacit and
explicit knowledge both are significant to knowledge creation and integration to gain competitive
advantage if the organization values the both knowledge. (Ragna Sidler-de Alwis, Evi
Hartamann, 2008) described that knowledge resides in every individuals is transformed into
corporate knowledge as a whole and develop for the company betterment.

Based on the different views above, knowledge will categorized to different perspectives of KM
as follows:

1. KM as an information technology (IT) perspective emphasizing technologies to store and

retrieve knowledge

2. Socialization perspective emphasizing on consideration on organizational values, culture

and nature

3. Information system perspective emphasizing on knowledge management system and

organization.

10
Generation of Knowledge management

This perspective leads to focus on the generations of KM and its interred related each others. The
development of KM and perspectives are continuously evolved over the year. According to Leila
A.Halawi, Jay E. Aronson (2005), there are at least three stages of KM generation. The
perspective will evolve thought out the generation as follows:

1. The first generation of KM is focuses in the area of Information technology that

motivated knowledge management and sharing values in the organization. At this stage,
using IT tools particularly internet based infrastructure, knowledge sharing and applying
best practices will create added value in the business. However on the other hand, the
extended SECI model stressed that the second stage focuses on socialization issues
including personal, culture and communication factors. According to (Sajjad M.Jassim.
2008) emphasized on the applying the importance of learning process from the work,
knowledge creation and adoption SECI mode and Communities of Practice (CoP). The
first KM stage has suggested that the next generation will be focused on Taxonomy
development and content management.

2. The second stage of KM generation is suggested on the sharing and transfer of

information. The conversion of knowledge is called externalization and internalization
refers to SECI process as combination. Its need social interactions to understand the
information, process and sorting.

3. Third generation of KM is proposed by McElroy (1999) mentioned by (Chalgee

Vorakulpipat. Yachine Rezgui, 2008). He identifies two generation of KM. He
emphasized on supply side of KM of capturing, codifying and sharing valuable
knowledge from knowledgeable person. On the other hand, the second generation focuses
on demand side of KM or knowledge creation.

However, the argument has raise that the above generations is more to the evolution of
knowledge processing than to knowledge management. They identify many weaknesses in the

11
first and third generation. The weaknesses are not clear to understand the KM generation. The
first stage concluded that there is no impact to the IT support on the development of best
practices. Furthermore, the distribution of information to higher management, business process
re-engineering and human factors is too constricted. In the second stage, its does not provide any
link between Cop and knowledge creation and innovation. The knowledge creation and
knowledge conversion does not articulate clearly in the SECI model. Finally, he found that
taxonomy development and content management is already in the generation of KM.

The three generation of KM are summarized below in the table 2. Although there is weaknesses
in first generation and second generation and focuses on knowledge sharing and knowledge
creation, the third generation is stay uncertain. The literature review will discuss the uncertain as
a gap by identifying a third generation as a future generation value creation.
I Generations of KM

Source: In an evolutionary and interpretive perspective to knowledge management (2008)

12
Value creation in next generation knowledge management

The literature review identified three major factors towards to value creation. (Chalgee
Vorakulpipat, Yachine Rezgui. 2008) said that value creation is increasingly developed in the
next generation of KM. The factors as follows:

1. Human Communication

According to (Sajjad M. Jassimuddin, 2008, pp.60) suggest human networks or

communication between individuals and firms provides facility for human interaction is
needed. Furthermore, (Marina du Plessis, 2007, pp.20) said human capital can improve
by formal and informal communication medium in effective way to promote
knowledge sharing and creation. Various methods are used such as social networks,
the use of metaphors and analogies and brainstorming. However he stressed that the
most effective way of knowledge transfer is face to face.

2. Social aspect

In the social aspect of knowledge management, it is important for the organization to

create ideas from the employee or individuals and interact and develop the ideas. The
developing and interaction needs social interaction or contacts. (Fei Goa et al, 2008, pp.7)
The firms will benefit when they establish strategic alliances involving exchange
information.

13
3. Innovation aspect

In the context of globalization and competitive advantage and technology advancement,

innovation is vital aspect in dynamic open market. The advancement and wide use of
knowledge management system is an essential to sustain value creation. The closer
relationship between innovations with economic growth, many researchers are attracted
to this area. Many Ceo’s are realized the important of innovation and technology despite
their new challenges in their management. The key success towards to value creation is
lies in the creativity and activity of making new roadmap instead of refining the existing
one.

Knowledge management system also plays important role in ensuring the innovation
process is available and accessible. (Marina du Plessis, 2007, pp.23). It’s gathering
internal and external knowledge via knowledge management system to provide
information to innovation team. This will acquire to use knowledge management
tools such as internet, databases and group of people to make it accessible.

A true value creation culture can be achieved with mixture of appropriate human
communication, social aspect, innovation and change process. Its needs learning process and
trust embedded to value creation objective and goals.

Conclusion

The literature review discussed of value creation in knowledge management perspective and
factors towards value creation emerge. The review has concludes that first generation tends
to knowledge sharing, current generation is knowledge creation and future generation is
value creation. In addition, value creation brings greater impact to knowledge management
with value creation factor emerge as an enabler to the future generation of KM. Human
communication, social aspect and innovation and many more are simulated to transform the
society to be distributed communities to link and share knowledge. However, the leadership

14
style and commitment, knowledge management practice and level of employees effort in the
organizational is significant and should not overlooked. (Sanjay Kumar Singh, 2008, pp.13)

15