Do we practise what we preach?

Abstract

Knowledge management systems are predominant in both theory and practice. However, are the same systems discussed in theory actualized in practice? By comparing and contrasting knowledge management systems in theory and practice, this paper demonstrates that they are indeed dissimilar. In theory, they have both subjective and objective components. In practice, only the objective component appears to be actualized; hence, these systems in practice are essentially organizational memory systems at best and not knowledge management systems at all. By unravelling the mystique of knowledge management systems, this paper exposes a fundamental anomaly. Further, an apparent void currently in practice is highlighted; namely, the lack of the subjective component of knowledge management systems in practice. They are being heralded as key systems that are vital for organizations to survive and thrive in the intense competitive environment of the information age. Surely then, a system that in practice supports not only the objective component, but also the subjective component of knowledge management, would indeed be a truly powerful system.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 67 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.