Author
Listed:
- Randah Alyafi Alzahri
(Management Department, College of Business Administration, King Saud University, Riyadh 11545, Saudi Arabia)
Abstract
This systematic narrative review synthesizes 42 distinct sources including peer-reviewed journal articles, selected conference papers, and policy documents to examine the role of knowledge management (KM) processes in Saudi higher education accreditation, with specific focus on the National Center for Academic Accreditation and Evaluation (NCAAA) standards. Drawing on literature published between 2005 and 2025, the review investigates how KM frameworks, including Nonaka and Takeuchi’s SECI model (socialization, externalization, combination, and internalization), may be associated with accreditation outcomes in Saudi universities. The reviewed literature suggests an association between systematic KM approaches and more effective accreditation processes; causal conclusions are not warranted given the observational and case study nature of the evidence base. Certainty of the overall evidence body is rated as low to moderate. The study reveals significant challenges, including information decentralization, inadequate training, resistance to change, and the absence of dedicated governance structures that appear to impede effective knowledge transfer during accreditation processes. A secondary sustainability coding pass identified associations between KM-driven accreditation practices and institutional sustainability, environmental sustainability, and alignment with SDG 4 (Quality Education) and SDG 16 (Strong Institutions); these findings are hypothesis-generating rather than confirmatory. It should be noted that all screening and data extraction were conducted by a sole reviewer; a post hoc validation exercise achieved Cohen’s kappa = 0.81 (95% CI: 0.72–0.90) for inclusion/exclusion decisions, providing retrospective assurance of acceptable consistency. This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
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:18:y:2026:i:13:p:6755-:d:1982461. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address
(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.