IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i3p682-d134441.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Visualizing the Academic Discipline of Knowledge Management

Author

Listed:
  • Peng Wang

    (Faculty of Management and Economics, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China)

  • Fang-Wei Zhu

    (Faculty of Management and Economics, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China)

  • Hao-Yang Song

    (Faculty of Management and Economics, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China)

  • Jian-Hua Hou

    (Research Center of Science Technology and Society, Dalian University, Dalian 116622, China)

  • Jin-Lan Zhang

    (Faculty of Management and Economics, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China)

Abstract

The aim of this paper was to evaluate the research status of knowledge management (KM) and identify the characteristics of KM in the literature. We selected and studied in detail 7628 original research articles from the Web of Science from 1974 to 2017. Although many studies have contributed to the evolution of the KM domain, our results showed that a comprehensive bibliometric and visualization investigation was required. The literature on KM has grown rapidly since the 1970s. The United States of America, as the original contributing country, has also internationally collaborated the most in this field of study. The National Cheng Kung University has made the highest number of contributions. The majority of authors contributed a small number of publications. Additionally, the most common category in KM research was management. The main publications for KM research include Journal of Knowledge Management , and Knowledge Management Research & Practice . A keywords analysis determined that “knowledge sharing”, “innovation”, “ontology”, and “knowledge management” were consistent hotspots in knowledge management research. Through a document co-citation analysis, the intellectual structures of knowledge management were defined, and four emerging trends were identified that focus on new phenomenon, the practice of knowledge management, small and medium enterprises (SMEs) management based on knowledge perspective, innovation and performance, and big data-enabled KM. We also provide eight research questions for future studies. Our results will benefit academics, researchers, and research students who want to rapidly obtain an overview of knowledge management research. This study can also be a starting point for communication between academics and practitioners.

Suggested Citation

  • Peng Wang & Fang-Wei Zhu & Hao-Yang Song & Jian-Hua Hou & Jin-Lan Zhang, 2018. "Visualizing the Academic Discipline of Knowledge Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-28, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:3:p:682-:d:134441
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/3/682/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/3/682/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Weiai Xu & I-Hsuan Chiu & Yixin Chen & Tanuka Mukherjee, 2015. "Twitter hashtags for health: applying network and content analyses to understand the health knowledge sharing in a Twitter-based community of practice," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(4), pages 1361-1380, July.
    2. Chaomei Chen, 2006. "CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 57(3), pages 359-377, February.
    3. Yinian Gu, 2004. "Global knowledge management research: A bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 61(2), pages 171-190, October.
    4. Luz M. Romo-Fernández & Vicente P. Guerrero-Bote & Félix Moya-Anegón, 2013. "Co-word based thematic analysis of renewable energy (1990–2010)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(3), pages 743-765, December.
    5. Chaomei Chen & Fidelia Ibekwe-SanJuan & Jianhua Hou, 2010. "The structure and dynamics of cocitation clusters: A multiple-perspective cocitation analysis," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(7), pages 1386-1409, July.
    6. Peyman Akhavan & Nader Ale Ebrahim & Mahdieh A. Fetrati & Amir Pezeshkan, 2016. "Major trends in knowledge management research: a bibliometric study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(3), pages 1249-1264, June.
    7. Rinia, E. J. & van Leeuwen, Th. N. & van Vuren, H. G. & van Raan, A. F. J., 1998. "Comparative analysis of a set of bibliometric indicators and central peer review criteria: Evaluation of condensed matter physics in the Netherlands," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 95-107, May.
    8. Nees Jan Eck & Ludo Waltman, 2010. "Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(2), pages 523-538, August.
    9. Wagner, Caroline S. & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2005. "Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1608-1618, December.
    10. Martine R. Haas & Morten T. Hansen, 2007. "Different knowledge, different benefits: toward a productivity perspective on knowledge sharing in organizations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(11), pages 1133-1153, November.
    11. Kerstin Fink & Christian Ploder, 2009. "Knowledge Management Toolkit for SMEs," International Journal of Knowledge Management (IJKM), IGI Global, vol. 5(1), pages 46-60, January.
    12. Piera Centobelli & Roberto Cerchione & Emilio Esposito, 2017. "Knowledge Management in Startups: Systematic Literature Review and Future Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-19, March.
    13. Henry Small, 1973. "Co‐citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 24(4), pages 265-269, July.
    14. Changling Li & Fengjiao Guo & Ling Zhi & Zhiping Han & Feifan Liu, 2013. "Knowledge management research status in China from 2006 to 2010: based on analysis of the degree theses," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 95-111, January.
    15. Henry Small & Phineas Upham, 2009. "Citation structure of an emerging research area on the verge of application," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 79(2), pages 365-375, May.
    16. Cerchione, Roberto & Esposito, Emilio, 2016. "A systematic review of supply chain knowledge management research: State of the art and research opportunities," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 276-292.
    17. Aija Leiponen & Constance E. Helfat, 2010. "Innovation objectives, knowledge sources, and the benefits of breadth," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 224-236, February.
    18. Loet Leydesdorff, 2004. "Top-down decomposition of the Journal Citation Reportof the Social Science Citation Index: Graph- and factor-analytical approaches," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 60(2), pages 159-180, June.
    19. Yoshiyuki Takeda & Shiho Mae & Yuya Kajikawa & Katsumori Matsushima, 2009. "Nanobiotechnology as an emerging research domain from nanotechnology: A bibliometric approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(1), pages 23-38, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Patricia Ordóñez de Pablos & Miltiadis Lytras, 2018. "Knowledge Management, Innovation and Big Data: Implications for Sustainability, Policy Making and Competitiveness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-7, June.
    2. Jawad Karamat & Tong Shurong & Naveed Ahmad & Abdul Waheed & Kashif Mahmood, 2018. "Enablers Supporting the Implementation of Knowledge Management in the Healthcare of Pakistan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-22, December.
    3. Perotti, Francesco Antonio & Ferraris, Alberto & Candelo, Elena & Busso, Donatella, 2022. "The dark side of knowledge sharing: Exploring “knowledge sabotage” and its antecedents," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 422-432.
    4. Jawad Karamat & Tong Shurong & Naveed Ahmad & Abdul Waheed & Shahbaz Khan, 2018. "Barriers to Knowledge Management in the Health Sector of Pakistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-22, November.
    5. Taewook Huh & Hyung-Ju Kim, 2018. "Korean Experimentation of Knowledge and Technology Transfer to Address Climate Change in Developing Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-15, April.
    6. Espinoza-Torres, Diana & Segarra-Oña, Marival, 2022. "Disentangling the relationship between prior knowledge and entrepreneurial orientation: a bibliometric study," TEC Empresarial, School of Business, Costa Rica Institute of Technology (ITCR), vol. 16(2), pages 1-17.
    7. Jiaqi Liu & Zhenping Zhang & Jiayin Qi & Hong Wu & Manyi Chen, 2019. "Understanding the Impact of Opinion Leaders’ Characteristics on Online Group Knowledge-Sharing Engagement from In-Group and Out-Group Perspectives: Evidence from a Chinese Online Knowledge-Sharing Com," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-28, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chen, Kaihua & Guan, Jiancheng, 2011. "A bibliometric investigation of research performance in emerging nanobiopharmaceuticals," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 233-247.
    2. Gaviria-Marin, Magaly & Merigó, José M. & Baier-Fuentes, Hugo, 2019. "Knowledge management: A global examination based on bibliometric analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 194-220.
    3. Boyack, Kevin W. & Klavans, Richard, 2014. "Including cited non-source items in a large-scale map of science: What difference does it make?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 569-580.
    4. Floris Goerlandt & Jie Li & Genserik Reniers, 2021. "The Landscape of Risk Perception Research: A Scientometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-26, November.
    5. Katalin Orosz & Illés J. Farkas & Péter Pollner, 2016. "Quantifying the changing role of past publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(2), pages 829-853, August.
    6. Chencheng Fang & Jiantong Zhang & Wei Qiu, 2017. "Online classified advertising: a review and bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(3), pages 1481-1511, December.
    7. Zhichao Wang & Valentin Zelenyuk, 2021. "Performance Analysis of Hospitals in Australia and its Peers: A Systematic Review," CEPA Working Papers Series WP012021, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    8. Jianhua Hou, 2017. "Exploration into the evolution and historical roots of citation analysis by referenced publication year spectroscopy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(3), pages 1437-1452, March.
    9. Shuo Xu & Liyuan Hao & Xin An & Hongshen Pang & Ting Li, 2020. "Review on emerging research topics with key-route main path analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 607-624, January.
    10. Jiaxing Jiang & Lin Fan, 2022. "Visualizing the Knowledge Domain of Language Experience: A Bibliometric Analysis," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440211, January.
    11. Ying Huang & Wolfgang Glänzel & Lin Zhang, 2021. "Tracing the development of mapping knowledge domains," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 6201-6224, July.
    12. Carlos Olmeda-Gómez & Maria-Antonia Ovalle-Perandones & Antonio Perianes-Rodríguez, 2017. "Co-word analysis and thematic landscapes in Spanish information science literature, 1985–2014," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 195-217, October.
    13. Zhigao Liu & Yimei Yin & Weidong Liu & Michael Dunford, 2015. "Visualizing the intellectual structure and evolution of innovation systems research: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(1), pages 135-158, April.
    14. Rongying Zhao & Ju Wang, 2011. "Visualizing the research on pervasive and ubiquitous computing," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(3), pages 593-612, March.
    15. Chengliang Liu & Qinchang Gui, 2016. "Mapping intellectual structures and dynamics of transport geography research: a scientometric overview from 1982 to 2014," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(1), pages 159-184, October.
    16. Kai Chen & Xiaoping Lin & Han Wang & Yujie Qiang & Jie Kong & Rui Huang & Haining Wang & Hui Liu, 2022. "Visualizing the Knowledge Base and Research Hotspot of Public Health Emergency Management: A Science Mapping Analysis-Based Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-23, June.
    17. Toshiyuki Hasumi & Mei-Shiu Chiu, 2022. "Online mathematics education as bio-eco-techno process: bibliometric analysis using co-authorship and bibliographic coupling," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4631-4654, August.
    18. Michel Zitt, 2015. "Meso-level retrieval: IR-bibliometrics interplay and hybrid citation-words methods in scientific fields delineation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(3), pages 2223-2245, March.
    19. Andrej Kastrin & Dimitar Hristovski, 2021. "Scientometric analysis and knowledge mapping of literature-based discovery (1986–2020)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1415-1451, February.
    20. Francisco Díez-Martín & Alicia Blanco-González & Camilo Prado-Román, 2021. "The intellectual structure of organizational legitimacy research: a co-citation analysis in business journals," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 1007-1043, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:3:p:682-:d:134441. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.