INTRODUCTION
Shortly before World War II, Vannevar Bush claimed that files should be accessible and stored according to how the human mind works, meaning by association (Nyce & Kahn, 1989), and stated, “Knowledge that cannot be selected is lost” (p. 216). Bush developed Memex, a knowledge management (KM) system, in response to a need to organize the growing scientific literature (Nyce & Kahn, 1989). Management theorists developed various techniques to overcome managerial problems and improve individual and collective performance within organizations (Ferreira et al., 2018). KM continued to evolve into the 1970s, when industrialization changed the organization of business structures (Geisler & Wickramasinghe, 2015). Organizations rely on effective management and knowledge at every stage of the business cycle (Mia & Chowdhuary, 2021). Knowledge management systems are essential building blocks of a business’s overall success formula and strategy execution shows where an organization excels, survives, or succumbs to external pressures (Twum, 2021). When research accumulates on a topic, there is a need to review the literature to provide a high-level view of the scholarship for a specific period. Despite older literature reviews on KM systems, there is a need for more current research (Ouriques et al., 2019). In Burley’s (2022) study, 26% of a survey’s respondents reported a belief that KM systems could improve performance by 40%. Thus, it is essential to review the literature and develop an overview of current data and information. There is a growing awareness of the importance of gathering, locating, capturing, and sharing collective knowledge and expertise. Societies are developing effective and efficient KM methods to address problems and benefit from opportunities (Tiwari, 2022), making KM increasingly vital. This review provides a current look at the exponential growth of literature and research on KM. This study contributes to the KM body of knowledge by presenting a broad range of KM systems, analyzing them, and categorizing them. We summarize the relevant literature, identify gaps, and suggest topics for future research. The following research questions guided the study: High-level question: What are the knowledge management systems? RQ1: What is the best knowledge management system for organizations to use? RQ2: What are the outcomes of knowledge management system best practices?
LITERATURE REVIEW
In this article, knowledge, data, and information are interchangeable. Based on the scope of KM research, we categorized academic publications and found four primary KM systems. 2.1. Knowledge Management Reward Only some KM endeavours are successful, regardless of the importance a company places on knowledge collection or reporting (Friedrich et al., 2020). Individuals might resist knowledge sharing or reporting due to their lack of understanding of a KM system, the inconvenience and time it takes, or not wanting to use it. Friedrich et al. (2020) identified several motives for knowledge-sharing, including altruism, self-efficacy, recognition, conformity, and reputation (table 1). Despite the risks of Friedrich et al.’s model, such as unnecessary rivalry between coworkers, anxiety based on poor ratings, and a tendency to lie to obtain better results, there are significantly more benefits to sharing knowledge. Among the advantages are creating visibility for a group to see their progress and allowing them to create their own goals, receiving immediate gratification for groups that perform well, supporting comparisons between coworkers, and opening conversations for best practices among similar groups (Friedrich et al., 2020). Because of these findings, researchers have embarked on studies to motivate and impact the contributors to knowledge (Iskandar et al., 2020).
Although no researchers have articulated KM reward strategies, several studies on a KM reward system, incentive design, and gamification have found positive results on engagement, motivation, and performance regarding KM. Gamification refers to the use of game design elements to encourage knowledge sharing motivation and productivity (Sampaio et. al, 2019). Iskandar et al. (2020) developed an incentive design system, in which users receive points for knowledge sharing, to replace a standing KM award system, where a maximum of 12 people receives a tier-divided contributor award. Regardless of the two systems’ nuances, this study supports using the KM award and incentive design to increase employees’ motivation to use a KMS (Iskandar et al., 2020). Because of the similar intentions of gamification, incentive design system, and the KM award, this paper refers to all three as KM reward. According to Friedrich et al. (2020), a KM reward is a good approach to increasing employee motivation. In addition, Endramanto et al. (2021) found that implementing
Commentaires