Citation classics published in knowledge management journals. Part III: author survey

Alexander Serenko · John Dumay

16 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Knowledge Management

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

scientometrics and bibliometrics research Publishing and Scholarly Communication Academic Writing and Publishing

Abstract

Purpose This paper is the third part of a series of works investigating the top 100 knowledge management (KM) citation classic articles. The purpose of this paper is to understand why KM citation classics are well-cited. Design/methodology/approach The results of a survey of 58 KM citation classic authors were reported as descriptive statistics and subjected to content analysis. Findings An archetype of a KM citation classic author was constructed including demographics, personal characteristics, motivation and work preferences. There is a need for developing novel ideas in KM research. Timeliness of a publication is directly linked to its future impact. Editors should involve citation classics authors as reviewers, and KM researchers should improve their citation practices. Serendipity played a very important role in early KM research, especially from the perspective of discovering new and interesting phenomena. Research limitations/implications Whereas the importance of serendipity is not questioned, future KM researchers should rely more on a formal, meticulous and well-planned research approach rather than on the hope of making a discovery by accident or luck. KM citation classics authors relied on serendipity to form the foundation of the discipline, but extending their work requires formal and structured inquiries. Practical implications Many authors conducted research to solve a problem to serve the needs of both practice and academia, rather than being overly theoretical. Originality/value Because KM researchers can no longer rely on past bibliometric theories, this paper helps understand why specific articles are highly cited and recommends how to conduct and develop future KM research that has impact.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

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

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 16 citations exist upstream.

References

1963The Structure of Scientific Revolutions 2007Persuasion With Case Studies 1926The frequency distribution of scientific productivity 2000Doing Critical Management Research 2005How Business Schools Lost Their Way 1977The essential tension : selected studies in scientific tradition and change 2012Reflections and projections: A decade of Intellectual Capital Accounting Research 2003The Balanced Scorecard: what is the score? A rhetorical analysis of the Balanced Scorecard

Cited by

2017Organizational capabilities and knowledge management success: a quartet of case studies 2021The effects of top management team strategic cognition on corporate financial health and value: an interactive multi-dimensional approach 2019Authorship trend and content analysis

Explore the map →

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

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.