Search results

1 – 10 of 66
To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 8 February 2021

Alexander Serenko

The purpose of this study is to conduct a structured literature review of scientometric research of the knowledge management (KM) discipline for the 2012–2019 time period.

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to conduct a structured literature review of scientometric research of the knowledge management (KM) discipline for the 2012–2019 time period.

Design/methodology/approach

A total of 175 scientometric studies of the KM discipline were identified and analyzed.

Findings

Scientometric KM research has entered the maturity stage: its volume has been growing, reaching six publications per month in 2019. Scientometric KM research has become highly specialized, which explains many inconsistent findings, and the interests of scientometric KM researchers and their preferred inquiry methods have changed over time. There is a dangerous trend toward a monopoly of the scholarly publishing market which affects researchers’ behavior. To create a list of keywords for database searches, scientometric KM scholars should rely on the formal KM keyword classification schemes, and KM-centric peer-reviewed journals should continue welcoming manuscripts on scientometric topics.

Practical implications

Stakeholders should realize that the KM discipline may successfully exist as a cluster of divergent schools of thought under an overarching KM umbrella and that the notion of intradisciplinary cohesion and consistency should be abandoned. Journal of Knowledge Management is unanimously recognized as a leading KM journal, but KM researchers should not limit their focus to the body of knowledge documented in the KM-centric publication forums. The top six most productive countries are the USA, the UK, Taiwan, Canada, Australia and China. There is a need for knowledge brokers that may deliver the KM academic body of knowledge to practitioners.

Originality/value

This is the most comprehensive, up-to-date analysis of the KM discipline.

Details

Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. ahead-of-print no. ahead-of-print
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1367-3270

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 14 June 2021

Alexander Serenko and Nick Bontis

The purpose of this study is to update a global ranking list of 28 knowledge management and intellectual capital (KM/IC) academic journals. The list should be periodically…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to update a global ranking list of 28 knowledge management and intellectual capital (KM/IC) academic journals. The list should be periodically updated because the pool of active KM/IC researchers changes, researchers adjust their journal perceptions, citation indices change and new journals appear while others become discontinued.

Design/methodology/approach

The ranking list was created based on a survey of 463 active KM/IC researchers and journal citation impact metrics (the h-index and the g-index).

Findings

Journal of Knowledge Management and Journal of Intellectual Capital are ranked A+, followed by The Learning Organization, Knowledge Management Research & Practice, VINE: The Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, Knowledge and Process Management and International Journal of Knowledge Management which are ranked A. VINE, Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management and Online Journal of Applied Knowledge Management have shown the most improvement. The recently established Journal of Innovation & Knowledge has demonstrated a strong performance.

Practical implications

KM/IC discipline stakeholders may consult and use the ranking list for various purposes, but they should do so with caution. Highly ranked journals are quite likely to have the Clarivate’s Journal Impact Factor or be included in the Clarivate’s Emerging Sources Citation Index. A journal’s longevity is strongly correlated with its citation metrics and is moderately correlated with expert survey scores. Interdisciplinarity is the natural state of the KM and IC research domains, and it should be embraced by the research community.

Originality/value

This study presents the most up-to-date ranking list of KM/IC academic journals.

Details

Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. ahead-of-print no. ahead-of-print
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1367-3270

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 30 March 2020

Alexander Serenko

This study aims to explore the existence of knowledge sabotage in the contemporary organization from the perspective of the target.

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims to explore the existence of knowledge sabotage in the contemporary organization from the perspective of the target.

Design/methodology/approach

This study collected and analyzed 172 critical incidents reported by 109 employees who were targets of knowledge sabotage in their organizations.

Findings

Over 50 per cent of employees experienced at least one knowledge sabotage incident. Knowledge sabotage is driven by three factors, namely, gratification, retaliation against other employees and one’s malevolent personality. Knowledge saboteurs are more likely to provide intangible than tangible knowledge. Knowledge sabotage results in extremely negative consequences for individuals, organizations and third parties. Organizations often indirectly facilitate knowledge sabotage among their employees. Both knowledge saboteurs and their targets believe in their innocence – saboteurs are certain that their action was a necessary response to targets’ inappropriate workplace behavior, whereas targets insist on their innocence and hold saboteurs solely responsible.

Practical implications

Organizations should recruit employees with compatible personalities and working styles, introduce inter-employee conflict prevention and resolution procedures, develop anti-knowledge sabotage policies, clearly articulate the individual and organizational consequences of knowledge sabotage and eliminate zero-sum game-based incentives and rewards.

Originality/value

This is the first study documenting knowledge sabotage from the target’s perspective.

Details

Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 24 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1367-3270

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 3 April 2017

Alexander Serenko and John Dumay

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…

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.

Details

Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 21 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1367-3270

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 31 August 2020

Alexander Serenko and Chun Wei Choo

This study empirically tests the impact of the Dark Triad personality traits (narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy) and co-worker competitiveness on knowledge sabotage.

Abstract

Purpose

This study empirically tests the impact of the Dark Triad personality traits (narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy) and co-worker competitiveness on knowledge sabotage.

Design/methodology/approach

A model was constructed and tested by means of Partial Least Squares with data from 150 participants recruited via Amazon’s Mechanical Turk.

Findings

The individual personality traits of narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy are significant predictors of individual knowledge sabotage behavior, whereas co-worker Machiavellianism and psychopathy trigger co-worker knowledge sabotage. Out of the three Dark Triad traits, individual and co-worker psychopathy emerged as the strongest knowledge sabotage predictor. Co-worker competitiveness has a positive effect on co-workers’ knowledge sabotage behavior. There is a relatively strong relationship between co-worker and individual knowledge sabotage which suggests that knowledge sabotage is a form of contagious workplace behavior. Individuals underestimate their negative behavior and traits and/or overestimate those of their fellow co-workers.

Practical implications

Managers should realize that the Dark Triad personality traits could predispose certain individuals to engage in extremely harmful counterproductive knowledge behavior. They need to ensure that individuals with these traits are not hired or are identified during their probation periods. It is recommended that organizations include knowledge sabotage measures in their periodic employee surveys. Organizations should help their employees objectively re-evaluate their own traits and knowledge behavior as well as those of their colleagues to ensure that their reciprocating knowledge behavior is more aligned with the reality in their organization.

Originality/value

This study offers a reliable and valid quantitative survey instrument to measure the presence of knowledge sabotage.

Details

Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 24 no. 9
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1367-3270

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 8 May 2017

Alexander Serenko and Nick Bontis

The purpose of this study is to update a global ranking of 27 knowledge management and intellectual capital (KM/IC) academic journals.

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to update a global ranking of 27 knowledge management and intellectual capital (KM/IC) academic journals.

Design/methodology/approach

The ranking was developed based on a combination of results from a survey of 482 active KM/IC researchers and journal citation impact indices.

Findings

The ranking list includes 27 currently active KM/IC journals. The A+ journals are the Journal of Knowledge Management and the Journal of Intellectual Capital. The A journals are the Learning Organization, Knowledge Management Research & Practice, Knowledge and Process Management, VINE: The Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems and International Journal of Knowledge Management. A majority of recently launched journals did not fare well in the ranking. Whereas a journal’s longevity is important, it is not the only factor affecting its ranking position. Expert survey and citation impact measures are relatively consistent, but expert survey ranking scores change faster.

Practical implications

KM/IC discipline stakeholders, including practitioners, editors, publishers, reviewers, researchers, students, administrators and librarians, may consult the developed ranking list for various purposes. Compared to 2008, more researchers indicated KM/IC as their primary area of concentration, which is a positive indicator of discipline development.

Originality/value

This is the most recent ranking list of KM/IC academic journals.

Details

Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 21 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1367-3270

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 15 July 2019

Alexander Serenko

This paper introduces the concept of knowledge sabotage as an extreme form of counterproductive knowledge behavior, presents its typology, and empirically demonstrates its…

Abstract

Purpose

This paper introduces the concept of knowledge sabotage as an extreme form of counterproductive knowledge behavior, presents its typology, and empirically demonstrates its existence in the contemporary organization.

Design/methodology/approach

Through the application of the critical incident technique, this study analyzes 177 knowledge sabotage incidents when employees intentionally provided others with wrong knowledge or deliberately concealed critical knowledge while clearly realizing others’ need for this knowledge and others’ ability to apply it to important work-related tasks.

Findings

Over 40% of employees engaged in knowledge sabotage, and many did so repeatedly. Knowledge saboteurs usually acted against their fellow co-workers, and one-half of all incidents were caused by interpersonal issues resulting from the target’s hostile behavior, failure to provide assistance to others, and poor performance. Knowledge sabotage was often expressed in the form of revenge against a particular individual, who, as a result, may have been reprimanded, humiliated or terminated. Knowledge saboteurs rarely regretted their behavior, which further confirmed the maliciousness of their intentions.

Practical implications

Even though knowledge saboteurs only rarely acted against their organizations purposely, approximately one-half of all incidents produced negative, unintentional consequences to their organizations, such as time waste, failed or delayed projects, lost clients, unnecessary expenses, hiring costs, products being out-of-stock, understaffing, or poor quality of products or services. Organizations should develop comprehensive knowledge sabotage prevention policies. The best way to reduce knowledge sabotage is to improve inter-personal relationships among employees and to foster a friendly and collaborative environment.

Originality/value

This is the first well-documented attempt to understand the phenomenon of knowledge sabotage.

Details

Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 23 no. 7
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1367-3270

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 10 October 2016

Alexander Serenko and Nick Bontis

This paper aims to explore antecedents and consequences of intra-organizational knowledge hiding.

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to explore antecedents and consequences of intra-organizational knowledge hiding.

Design/methodology/approach

A model was developed and tested with data collected from 691 knowledge workers from 15 North American credit unions.

Findings

Knowledge hiding and knowledge sharing belong to unique yet possibly overlapping constructs. Individual employees believe that they engage in knowledge hiding to a lesser degree than their co-workers. The availability of knowledge management systems and knowledge policies has no impact on intra-organizational knowledge hiding. The existence of a positive organizational knowledge culture has a negative effect on intra-organizational knowledge hiding. In contrast, job insecurity motivates knowledge hiding. Employees may reciprocate negative knowledge behavior, and knowledge hiding promotes voluntary turnover.

Practical implications

Managers should realize the uniqueness of counterproductive knowledge behavior and develop proactive measures to reduce or eliminate it.

Originality/value

Counterproductive knowledge behavior is dramatically under-represented in knowledge management research, and this study attempts to fill that void.

Details

Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 20 no. 6
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1367-3270

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 11 July 2016

Alexander Serenko and Nick Bontis

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of exchange modes – negotiated, reciprocal, generalized, and productive – on inter-employee knowledge sharing.

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of exchange modes – negotiated, reciprocal, generalized, and productive – on inter-employee knowledge sharing.

Design/methodology/approach

Based on the affect theory of social exchange, a theoretical model was developed and empirically tested using a survey of 691 employees from 15 North American credit unions.

Findings

The negotiated mode of knowledge exchange, i.e. when a knowledge contributor explicitly establishes reciprocation conditions with a recipient, develops negative knowledge sharing attitude. The reciprocal mode, i.e. when a knowledge donor assumes that a receiver will reciprocate, has no effect on knowledge sharing attitude. The generalized exchange form, i.e. when a knowledge contributor believes that other organizational members may reciprocate, is weakly related to knowledge sharing attitude. The productive exchange mode, i.e. when a knowledge provider assumes he or she is a responsible citizen within a cooperative enterprise, strongly facilitates the development of knowledge sharing attitude, which, in turn, leads to knowledge sharing intentions.

Practical implications

To facilitate inter-employee knowledge sharing, managers should focus on the development of positive knowledge sharing culture when all employees believe they contribute to a common good instead of expecting reciprocal benefits.

Originality/value

This is one of the first studies to apply the affect theory of social exchange to study knowledge sharing.

Details

Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 20 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1367-3270

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 18 June 2021

Alexander Serenko, John Dumay, Pei-Chi Kelly Hsiao and Chun Wei Choo

In scholarly publications, citations play an essential epistemic role in creating and disseminating knowledge. Conversely, the use of problematic citations impedes the…

Abstract

Purpose

In scholarly publications, citations play an essential epistemic role in creating and disseminating knowledge. Conversely, the use of problematic citations impedes the growth of knowledge, contaminates the knowledge base and disserves science. This study investigates the presence of problematic citations in the works of business ethics scholars.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors investigated two types of problematic citations: inaccurate citations and plagiarized citations. For this, 1,200 randomly selected citations from three leading business ethics journals were assessed based on: (1) referenced journal errors, (2) article title errors and (3) author name errors. Other papers that replicated the same title errors were identified.

Findings

Of the citations in the examined business ethics journals, 21.42% have at least one error. Of particular concern are the citation errors in article titles, where 3.75% of examined citations have minor errors and another 3.75% display major errors – 7.5% in total. Two-thirds of minor and major title errors were repeatedly replicated in previous and ensuing publications, which confirms the presence of citation plagiarism. An average article published in a business ethics journal contains at least three plagiarized citations. Even though business ethics fares well compared to other disciplines, a situation where every fifth citation is problematic is unacceptable.

Practical implications

Business ethics scholars are not immune to the use of problematic citations, and it is unlikely that attempting to improve researchers' awareness of the unethicality of this behavior will bring a desirable outcome.

Originality/value

Identifying that problematic citations exist in the business ethics literature is novel because it is expected that these researchers would not condone this practice.

Details

Journal of Documentation, vol. ahead-of-print no. ahead-of-print
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0022-0418

Keywords

1 – 10 of 66