The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0305-5728.htm

Knowledge
A case study on knowledge management
management implementation in implementation
the banking sector
211
Ahmed Belaid Kridan and Jack Steven Goulding
School of Construction and Property Management, University of Salford,
Salford, UK

Abstract
Purpose Knowledge management literature predominant comes from a western perspective. The
purpose of this paper is to report on an empirical study to find out if the organisations acting in less
business environment such as Libyan organisations (banking in particular) will be able to implement a
knowledge management system (KMS) and how they can benefit from it.
Design/methodology/approach The study is built mainly around what question related to
information processes within organisations within a social context. This study uses a case study
approach using an interpretive perspective (a qualitative method) to map and describe relationships.
This approach enables a greater degree of granularity to be captured.
Findings The benefit of KMS is an essential step in defining critical areas in implementing a KMS
and determining strategy in this research. The results show that KMS could be of most significance for
enhancing the organisations performance and led them to better position in todays competitive
environment. These benefits are fundamental issues related to different encouragements in KMS
implementation such as better decision-making, improving the customer relationship and
management, create new value through new services (innovations), and creating additional
businesses.
Originality/value The banking and financial sectors are fundamental drivers of innovation. In
this context, their contribution to KM concept and applications are of specific value, especially
concerning the leverage of intellectual capital. Knowledge intensive organisations like these are
increasingly implementing KMS to drive forward their strategies and improve performance. This
paper therefore, focuses specially on presenting a framework tailored to meet the banking and
financial sectors needs.
Keywords Knowledge management, Knowledge management systems, Libya,
Organisational performance, Banking, Business performance
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
Knowledge is becoming increasingly more useful and important for organisations
(Carneiro, 2000), and is now recognised as a resource that is valuable to an organisations
ability to innovate and compete. It exists within the individual employees, and also in a
composite sense within the organisation (Bollinger and Smith, 2001). The importance of
knowledge lies in the creativity value that it adds to the organisations assets, and in its

First of all the author would like to thank the British and the Libyan banks which used in the VINE: The journal of information and
knowledge management systems
pilot study, further thanks goes to all Libyan banks for the welcome offered to the researcher for Vol. 36 No. 2, 2006
the interview. Special thanks are given to the IT Department at the Libyan Central Bank that pp. 211-222
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
provided time and information, and to the Manager for his help in providing details about KMS 0305-5728
to the other interviewees. DOI 10.1108/03055720610683013
VINE ability to improve the effectiveness of an organisations intellectual capital which defined
36,2 as the sum of a organisations ideas, inventions, technologies, general knowledge,
computer programs, designs, data skills, processes, creativity, and publications (Sullivan,
1999). Developments in the management of knowledge can help managers improve their
day-to-day work, decision-making processes, create new responses, and enable a set of
competitive reactions to be augmented. The implementation of a knowledge management
212 system (KMS) is a systematic, integrated, and planned approach, designed to solve
problems that can adversely affect the operating efficiency at all organisation levels.
Management is likely to be successful only if it has a true strategic orientation approach to
manage its stock of knowledge (Edvinsson, 1997). The use and application of knowledge
now represents a key source for sustained competitive advantage (Drucker, 1993; Quinn,
1992b; Reich, 1991). Considering knowledge management (KM) as a concept; KPMG
Consulting (1998), noted that:
There is little doubt that we have entered the knowledge economy where what organisations
know is becoming more important than the traditional sources of economic power.
The importance of knowledge has been increasing in the last two decades, especially in
Western businesses where it has been a fledgling concept for some time, and where now
it has become a mainstream business function. Currently, many organisations are now
attempting to provide an internal and external environment for adopting a KMS to
ensure their existing knowledge is properly managed and capitalised upon. A KMS
should be developed as a response to changes in the internal and external environments,
since as Carneiro (2000) observes, such a system should be adapted to solve problems
that negatively affect operating efficiency. Furthermore, Davenport and Volpel (2001)
state that most large organisations in the USA, and many in Europe, including every
major organisation in the professional services, automobile, pharmaceutical, oil
industries, and even consulting organisations, have a KMS. Furthermore, they note that
chief knowledge officer positions are increasingly being established in many
organisations, and that this concept has penetrated into many different functions and
processes of business. The promised benefits from implementing KMS are certainly
attracting an increasing number of organisations, but there are a number of difficulties
that need to be managed when designing a KMS (or implementing its initiatives), as
documented by Al-Ghassani et al. (2004). These difficulties, along with some
unsuccessful KM initiatives worry many organisations interested in the concept
(Al-Ghassani et al., 2004).
Because the majority of literature regarding KM comes from a western perspective,
it was necessary for this research to discover the relevant and important of KMS within
a developing country such as Libya. This paper, therefore illustrates the results of a
preliminary case study that provide information relating to the importance of KMS in
the context of the Libyan banking environment.

Theoretical foundations
KM is seen as a significant component of a business strategy that has the ability to
provide an organisation with opportunities to manage new market challenges.
Additionally, as Teece (1998) argues, knowledge can form the basis for sustained
competitive advantage. The number of organisations claiming to work with KM is
growing progressively (Grover and Davenport, 2001; Martensson, 2000; Moffett et al.,
2002), and it can be seen that this interest in managing knowledge stems from several Knowledge
reasons. Firstly, KM has proven benefits and has been adopted by 80 per cent of the management
worlds biggest organisations (KPMG Consulting, 2000). Secondly, core competencies
are ostensibly based on KM, and therefore rely on the skills and experience of the implementation
people who do the work; but the fact that these may not exist in a physical form in
the future, increases the attractiveness of KMSs (Manville and Foote, 1996). Thirdly,
the recent changes in business direction emphasises the importance of greater 213
understanding of knowledge-intensive work, and how people think, learn, and use
knowledge (Brown and Duguid, 2000; Damasio, 1994, 1999; Klein, 1998; Nonaka and
Takeuchi, 1995; Wiig, 1994). And fourthly, organisations with greater knowledge can
combine traditional resources and assets in new and distinctive ways, thereby
providing greater value to customers (Teece et al., 1997).
Considering the important of KMS to organisations, Davenport and Volpel (2001)
state that:
We believe that the management of knowledge will continue to grow in its importance to
business success. Although the knowledge management movement has aspects of
faddishness (many conferences, many books, many articles in the business press), and it
may lose some of its current level of visibility, it must become part of the basic fabric of
successful businesses. There are too many knowledge workers dealing with too much
knowledge for knowledge management to disappear.
KM has emerged to create and leverage intellectual capital into the business equation
and into public management (Allee, 1998; Reich, 1991; Wiig, 1994, 1997). KM is a
valuable strategic tool, because it can be a key resource for decision-making, mainly for
the formulation of alternative strategies. It can also improve the conditions for strategic
action by providing the means by which organisations can come to appreciate and
manage problems and challenges. Strategically, the success of most management
decisions depends also on competitive effort, which includes a deep knowledge of
customers attitudes and analysis of the competition (Curren et al., 1992).
The purpose, goal and expected outcomes of an organisations work with its KMS
are many. For instance, KMS can be seen as a way to improve performance (Bassi,
1997); productivity and competitiveness (Maglitta, 1995); a way to improve effective
acquisition, sharing and usage of information within organisations; a tool for improved
decision-making (Cole-Gomolski, 1997) a way to capture best practice (Cole-Gomolski,
1998); a way to reduce research costs and delays (Maglitta, 1995); and a way to become
a more innovative organisation (Hibbard and Carrillo, 1998; Mayo, 1998). Certainly,
effective management of knowledge will enable an organisation to provide better
customer service, as several scholars and industry analysts have argued (Bohn, 1994;
Nonaka, 1991; Quinn, 1992a; Toffler, 1990). Based on the logic of the preceding
paragraphs, and as Bollinger and Smith (2001) stated, managing knowledge is a
strategic asset and must be implemented effectively.
Any organisation should have the capacity to exploit its knowledge and learning
capabilities better than its rivals if it decides to assume a given competitive strategy
(Grant and Gnyawali, 1996; Roth, 1996). In this context, the business community has
articulated the following core KM objectives, through an analysis described by KPMG
Consulting (1998) as:
VINE .
supporting innovation, the generation of new ideas and the exploitation of the
36,2 organisations thinking power;
.
capturing insight and experience to make them available and usable when,
where, and by whom required;
.
making it easy to find and reuse sources of know-how and expertise, whether
they are recorded in a physical form or held in someones mind (tacit knowledge);
214 .
fostering collaboration, knowledge sharing, continual learning and
improvement;
.
improving the quality of decision-making and other intelligent tasks; and
.
understanding the value and contribution of intellectual assets and increasing
their worth, effectiveness and exploitation.

Further to the points raised by KPMG (1999) and Arora (2002) suggested that:
.
Organisations should leverage their existing knowledge-based activities in order
to prevent re-inventing the wheel.
.
Organisations should continually increase their competence and skill levels in
order to improve productivity, innovation, etc. This mandate will also help
minimise making wrong decisions.

Therefore, organisations are focussing on the development of KMS applications in a

bid to increase the competence and capabilities of their knowledge workers. This is
also referred to as investing in human capital (Edvinsson, 1997). Within the
organisational context, KMS should be able to combine innovation efforts, update IT,
and knowledge development in order to achieve a set of capabilities to increase
competitiveness. In fact, when this combination is adequately managed the
organisation can formulate competitive strategies, which integrate innovative products
and new technological weapons to face its competitors (Carneiro, 2000). Furthermore,
Quinn (1992a) states that KM plays important roles in public and private
organisations, with each role serving specific demands and purposes, and being
implemented differently. In public organisations, for example, KM areas are considered
to enhance decision-making within public services; aid the public to participate
effectively in public decision-making; build competitive societal information
community capabilities; and develop a knowledge-competitive workforce.
Also in this respect, as indicated by Beijerseuit (2000), organisational knowledge is
concerned with things such as management, policy, culture, personnel, career
planning, internal processes, cut backs, alliances and teamwork. When considering
marketing knowledge, one should think of phenomena such as competition, suppliers,
customers, markets, target groups, consumers, clients, users, interested parties, sales,
after sales, trade and distribution and relation management. When considering
technological knowledge, one should think of product knowledge, research and
development, core competencies, technological development, information and
communications technology, product development and assembly.
From the KM literature, it can be seen that there are multifarious of guidance
concerning KM implementation, and explicit guidelines and approaches are
well-developed in this regard. Employee know-how is one component of
organisational knowledge and a crucial strategic resource (Wiig, 1997). This means
that organisations must learn the weaknesses, strengths and movements of their direct Knowledge
competitors; and how their customers perceive their products; and they must management
simultaneously find a way to tap into this knowledge base in order to conserve and
increase their core competencies. implementation
In conclusion, organisations that desire to grow and stay competitive must develop
mechanisms for acquiring relevant knowledge, and exchanging it accurately, consistently,
concisely and in a timely manner with all who need it. Furthermore, numerous KM 215
approaches can be adopted to serve these purposes; and it is also important and necessary
for organisations to adopt and implement KMS to survive competition and gain
competitive advantage for themselves in a knowledge economy. Organisations need better
control of the knowledge they already have, and currently, many organisations are
unaware of what knowledge they possess that can be gainfully employed. A KMS has the
capacity to make an organisation better and help people do their jobs better.

Research approach and methodology

This preliminary research was conducted in Libya, using the banking industry as the
core context, and three banks featured in the study. One bank is the Central Bank,
responsible for programs, strategies and policies for all Libyan banks; the second bank
is a Specialist Bank in real estate and investment; and the third bank is a Commercial
Bank. From a research methodology perspective, face-to-face interviews were used as a
suitable data collection method. This approach involved over (25) senior executives
from information technology (IT), human resources (HR), planning and developments
(P&D), and other business areas. This diversity of participants (actors) was necessary
to gain a holistic appreciation of the totality of their experiences in their functional or
professional group and helped generate a wide and comprehensive variety of opinions,
views and issues. The participants involved in this research (Table I), and the size and
annual business (by revenues) of organisations (Table II).
The primary goal of this research was to elicit a variety of opinions and viewpoints
from IT, HR and P&D professionals from different banking areas the constitution of
which can be seen in Figure 1.
The research adopted the face-to-face interview technique, within an overall
exploratory case study approach. This is considered to be the most appropriate
approach when the focus is on a contemporary phenomenon within a real-life context
(Yin, 1994; Benbasat, 1987; Remenyi et al., 1998; Merriam, 1988). Furthermore, this

Position in the bank Total number of interviews

Senior manger (head of the bank or deputy) 3

Head of IT department 6
Head of banking operations 2
Head of accountancy and administration 1
Head of planning and development 4
Head of human resources 6
Head of technical projects 3
Technical 5
Employee 5 Table I.
Total 35 Number of interviews
VINE approach was also considered suitable as it is widely acknowledged to be extensively
36,2 used for quantitative data collection in social research.
The data collected were subsequently compiled, extracted and analysed, the results
of which were then broadly summarised along various themes in relation to KM.

Study findings
216 Because of the ambiguity of KM and its definition it was necessary to find out what
Libyan banks understood by the term knowledge and KM, and to see their interest in
the subject (awareness and importance of knowledge management system at the
Libyan Banks), 35 people (Table I) were interviewed initially to answer these questions:
Q1. Do you think knowledge is a valuable asset in your bank and should be
processed and managed by KMS?
The interviewees with percentage of (93 per cent) indicated that knowledge asset is the
most valuable resource for the banks in todays environment, which means a creative
approach to KMS is urgently required for the banks to improve the banks efficiency, and to
meet international banking standards. Even though it is indicated that some of the KM
terms may be foreign to many of the respondents, they believe strongly in the value of
knowledge and its benefits. The respondents also indicate that the intangible
(i.e. knowledge/intellectual capital assets) in the banks should be processed and managed:
Q2. Does your bank have a number of experts who may possess a huge amount
of knowledge?
The participants responses indicate that the banks under study have a
clear understanding of the value of their employees, especially the experts.

Turnover Number of people

Bank () Total workforce Core business area interviewed

1 15,090.34m 330 Central Bank 9

Table II. 2 60m 1,133 Real State and Investment Bank 15
Size and annual business 3 25m 3,000 Trade and Investment Bank 11

Figure 1.
Interview breakdown
About 78 per cent indicated agreement that the banks should be extremely aware of the Knowledge
importance of providing their expert bankers with challenging work to retain their management
knowledge to the banks database (a KMS is a necessary element):
implementation
Q3. Is the concept of KM clear to you and at your bank or it shapes with other
concepts?
With respect to the questions dealing with the knowledge perspective it appeared 217
that some people were not familiar with the term or concept of a knowledge
management. About 16 per cent were familiar with the term, 65 per cent neutral, and
19 per cent were unfamiliar.
There was some ambiguity over the terms knowledge management and information
technology some of the interviewees indicate term information technology as a mean of
KM, whereas others said intellectual capital some others said that KM is a processing of
organisational knowledge, HR management, organisation learning, and only few others
said they do not know about the concept of KM:
Q4. Do you think you are your bank naturally will be transformed to KMS?
It was also evident that the respondents did not feel that the banks were ready to transform
itself into KM-based-banks. Only 12 per cent agreed that the banks were ready to be
transformed into KMS (19 per cent were neutral, 69 per cent disagreed). Most of the
interviewees agreed that their banks have a limited attention to such KM programs, and so
generally little or no KM objectives were formulated. There was no formal KMS
implementation over all banks. One participant from the Central Bank believes that KM
objectives should be set from the start and the banks should know the expectation to
achieve with KMS as well as to improve information-handing capacity before starting any
KM initiatives. Theses goals had to be understood by the entire bank at the different levels:
Q5. Select the stage of development of the KM initiative in your unit and in your
bank?
About 87 per cent of the interviewers said there is no KM program in place, 7 per cent
said not considering any KM program, 3 per cent said the program is under
consideration, and 3 per cent said they have the KM activities:
Q6. Why do you think your bank has not implemented any KM systems?
Most of the Libyan public banks are not aware of KMS 38 per cent, inability to
implement KM, 22 per cent, insufficient organisation processes, 11 per cent, insufficient
knowledge about KMS, 9 per cent, financial limitation, 5 per cent, and 15 per cent
others, such as insufficient technology, insufficient employees skills, lack of guidance
and methodologies, KMS limitation, KMS is not important:
Q7. Do you think your bank should have clear strategies for implementing KMS?
This question was meant to see the vision of the KMS strategy, it is important for
organisations to identify clearly the direction in which the organisation is headed;
76 per cent indicated that the banks need to have very clear strategies for acquiring,
transferring and using knowledge among their expert employees. This strategy could
also assist as a checklist to ensure that the knowledge management program covers all
key elements of the banks:
VINE Q8. Is KMS important to your bank to be success in todays business environment?
36,2 The vast majority of the respondents agreed that, to be truly successful in business
today (79 per cent agreed) and in the future (81 per cent agreed), one needs to see the
world from a knowledge perspective.
About 91 per cent said the bank has knowledge lost, 77 per cent said there is lack
of knowledge knowledge not available 88 per cent said the bank suffers from
218 error duplications, (65 per cent) said data and information are not interpreted well,
(82 per cent) said other issues like lack of:
.
competitors information;
.
customers information;
.
alliances and international organisations information; and
.
internal and external environments information

That makes it very clear in the group sessions and all interviewees are well aware of
the risk of not having an appropriate KMS to manage their daily operations in terms of
capturing the large amount of information flows generated by the employees,
customers and suppliers of the banks at all levels without exception. The risk can even
grow exponentially as many of the exchanged or shared information is stored in a
primitive way but without being effectively exploited due to the lack of an intelligent
and solid KMS provided for this purpose:
Q9. What are the benefits of knowledge management system?
The survey interviews showed that many benefits can be obtained by KMS in the all
Libyan banks, particularly, when supported by government and senior management
(Table III). Although many of the benefits of KMS are some time intangible and
difficult to quantify and obtain there are a sharing view on the fact that the benefits of
KMS can be translated by a successful KMS implementation at the LPBs.

Discussion
Data were elicited from the Libyan public banks; the contributors who have a very
well-established background in the field of senior management, HR, IT and R&D were
the main respondents in this study and the results from the three banks, gained
through the interviews were found to be in agreement. This permitted a more valid
conclusion to be drawn from the study. The preliminary research makes an attempt to
improve our understanding first about the importance of KMS to the Libyan banking
industry, the benefits that the Libyan public banks can gain from running KM systems
and drivers for effective implementation of KM mechanisms across the Libyan public
banks. This was undermined by the need to survive in an information-driven economy.
For example, the banks will not be able to compete in an open economy unless they
have invested in such new programmes to get the most value from the banks assets.
In this context, an effective KM programme was seen as an appropriate tool to control
business focus helping Libyan public banks to address a clear, concrete and
imperative problem through the design of KM activities.
In this context, identifying critical knowledge implementation areas (CKIAs) will be
an essential step in defining competitive forces and determining strategy in this
research. The CKIA will comprise another critical success factor that can be used in
Number Benefit Percentage
Knowledge
management
1 Exploitation of the banks thinking power; 76
2 Capturing insight and experience to make them available and usable when,
implementation
where and by whom required 76
3 Improve the customer relationship and management 67
4 Enhance employees development and satisfaction 81 219
5 Create new value through new services (innovations) 83
6 Enhance current value of existing services (knowledge about customers) 74
7 KMS could be a base to many other banking programmes (such as National
Payment System) 97
8 Reduce/avoid costs/promote reuse (knowledge about processes) 65
9 Reduce uncertainty/increase speed of response (knowledge about the
environment) 84
10 Increasing workers productivity and performance 87
11 Fostering collaboration, knowledge sharing, continual learning and
improvement 89
12 Employees will spend less time looking for information and expertise 69
13 Enabling for more intelligent decisions 95
14 Help banks to become more competitive 90
15 Better customer handling 56
16 Faster response to key business 67
17 Improved employee skills 82
18 Increased profits 61
19 Increased innovation 88
20 Sharing best practice 85
21 New ways of working 55 Table III.
22 Create additional business 77 Benefits of KMS to the
23 Staff attraction/retention 81 Libyan public banks

conducting situational and competitive analysis, formulating differentiating strategies,

making strategic decisions, and aligning the organisation infrastructure for KMS
implementation strategy fulfilment.
Also, before formulating any KM mechanisms, it is important to assess the
organisational readiness, especially, for those parts of the organisation, which are to be
directly affected by the new KM processes. In this understanding, Edvinsson
emphasises that an organisation should only measure what is strategically important
for growth (the things that will guide the organisation into the future) (Edvinsson,
1997; Stewart, 1994). In this matter one of the study limitations of a study conducted by
Wong and Aspinwall (2005) was that the survey was aimed at exploring the perception
of the respondents with respect to the importance of the CSFs. The authors in this case
said that:
It would be interesting to expand this study in the future by investigating the practice of
these factors. Hence, the emphasis would shift from perceived importance to what
organisations do in practice in order to make their KM initiative successful.
Accordingly, further research is necessary to assess the CKIAs in practice within the
Libyan public banks, because the realisation of an effective KMS requires an
appropriate level and integration of organisational commitment, change management
VINE practices, IT systems and other KM enablers. The aim of the secondary research
36,2 should be to determine how the effective use of the CKIAs can support or enhance a
well-defined KM implementation strategy.
It is also important in terms of KM implementation to identify the existing gaps
within the CKIAs and KMS before suggesting any KM framework for implementing
KM within the LPBs, and with regard to the areas that can enable KMS across banks, it
220 is important to assess the banks readiness for these. The main role of environmental
analysis is to detect, monitor, and analyse those current and potential trends and
events that will create opportunities or threats to KMS implementation. This
preliminary study provides answers to some fundamental questions related to KM and
its implementation. These answers should be used as basis for the secondary research.

Conclusion
A KMS could allow Libyan banks to meet the national and international requirements,
but they also recognised that Libyan banks are still at the beginning of the long
journey towards implementation, and therefore, were some time away from fully
benefiting from a KMS. It can be suggested that implementation of KM mechanisms
can result in services and process improvement, and the creation of a centralised
communication system for the banking industry. The significant role that a KMS
might play in all Libyan banks was acknowledged by most of the interviewees, it was
also appreciated that the present environment and circumstances at the LPBs are not
ready to engage in any KM initiatives since more support is required more support
from the banks in terms of their structure, people, technology, goals and objectives and
internal and external environment.
However, it seems that the current situation at the Libyan public banks is that they
are ready to deal separately with each regulatory system that can benefit the banks
and they can recognise its strategic importance. Also it is necessary for these systems
to be accompanied with guidelines or a road map that makes their implementation
more effective and less time-consuming.

References
Al-Ghassani, A., Kamara, J., Anumba, C. and Carrillo, P. (2004), An innovative approach to
identifying knowledge management problems, Engineering, Construction and
Architectural Management, Vol. 11 No. 5, pp. 349-57.
Allee, V. (1998), The Knowledge Evolution, Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, MA.
Arora, R. (2002), Implementing KM a balanced score card approach, Journal of Knowledge
Management, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 240-9.
Bassi, L.J. (1997), Harnessing the power of intellectual capital, Training & Development, Vol. 51
No. 12, pp. 25-30.
Bohn, R. (1994), Measuring and managing technological knowledge, Sloan Management
Review, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 61-72.
Brown, J. and Duguid, P. (2000), Balancing act: how to capture knowledge without killing it,
Harvard Business Review, Vol. 78 No. 3, pp. 73-80.
Carneiro, A. (2000), How does knowledge management influence innovation and
competitiveness?, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 4, pp. 287-98.
Cole-Gomolski, B. (1997), Users loath to share their know-how, Computerworld, Vol. 31 No. 46, Knowledge
p. 6.
management
Cole-Gomolski, B. (1998), Vendors cram knowledge-ware market, Computerworld, Vol. 31 No. 5,
pp. 55-6. implementation
Curren, M.T., Folkes, V.S. and Steckel, J.H. (1992), Explanations for successful and unsuccessful
marketing decisions: the decision makers perspective, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56 No. 2,
pp. 18-31. 221
Bollinger, S. and Smith, D. (2001), Managing organisational knowledge as a strategic asset,
Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 8-18.
Beijerseuit, R.P. (2000), Knowledge management in small and medium-sized companies:
knowledge management for entrepreneurs, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 4
No. 2, pp. 162-79.
Benbasat, I. (1987), Analysis of research methodologies, in McFarlane, F. (Ed.), The Information
Systems Research Challenge, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA, p. Press.
Damasio, A.R. (1994), Descartes Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain,
Grosset/Putnam, New York, NY.
Damasio, A.R. (1999), The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of
Consciousness, Harcourt-Brace, New York, NY.
Davenport, T.H. and Volpel, S. (2001), The rise of knowledge towards attention management,
Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 212-22.
Drucker, P. (1993), Post-Capitalist Society, Harper Collins, New York, NY.
Edvinsson, L. (1997), Developing intellectual capital at Skandia, Long Range Planning, Vol. 30
No. 3, pp. 366-73.
Grant, J.H. and Gnyawali, D.R. (1996), Strategic process improvement through organisational
learning, Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 28-33.
Grover, V. and Davenport, T.H. (2001), General perspectives on knowledge management:
fostering a research agenda, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 18 No. 1,
pp. 5-21.
Hibbard, J. and Carrillo, K.M. (1998), Knowledge revolution, Information Week, Vol. 5 No. 663,
pp. 49-54.
Klein, G. (1998), Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
KPMG Consulting (1998) Knowledge Management Research Report 1998, available at:
www.kpmg.interact.nl/publication/kmsurvey.shtml (accessed 16 January 2004).
KPMG (1999), Power of knowledge a business guide to knowledge management, KPMG
Management Consulting, available at: www.kpmg.com (accessed 23 May 2003).
KPMG Consulting (2000) Knowledge Management Research Report 2000, available at:
www.kpmg.interact.nl/publication/kmsurvey.shtml (accessed 12 November 2003).
Maglitta, J. (1995), Smarten up!, Computerworld, Vol. 29 No. 23, p. 84.
Manville, B. and Foote, N. (1996), Harvest your workers knowledge, available at:
www.datamation.com/PlugIn/Issues/1996/July/07know1.html (accessed 23 May 2003).
Martensson, M. (2000), A critical review of knowledge management as a management tool,
Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 204-16.
Mayo, A. (1998), Memory bankers, People Management, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 34-8.
Merriam, S. (1988), Case study research in education: a qualitative approach, Jossey-Bass,
San Francisco, CA.
VINE Moffett, S., McAdam, R. and Parkinson, S. (2002), Developing a model for technology and
cultural factors in knowledge management: a factor analysis, Knowledge and Process
36,2 Management, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 237-55.
Nonaka, I. (1991), The knowledge-creating company, Harvard Business Review,
November-December, pp. 96-104.
Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995), The Knowledge Creating Company How Japanese
222 Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Quinn, J.B. (1992a), Intelligent Enterprise: A Knowledge and Service Based Paradigm for Industry,
Free Press, New York, NY.
Quinn, J.B. (1992b), The intelligent enterprise: a new paradigm, The Academy of Management
Executives, Vol. 6, pp. 448-64.
Reich, R. (1991), The Work of Nations: Preparing Ourselves for the 21st Century, Vintage Books,
New York, NY.
Remenyi, D., Williams, B., Arthur, M. and Ethne, S. (1998), Doing Research in Business and
Management. An introduction to Process and Method, Sage, London.
Roth, A.V. (1996), Achieving strategic agility through economies of knowledge, Strategy &
Leadership, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 30-7.
Stewart, T.A. (1994), Your companys most valuable asset: intellectual capital, Fortune, Vol. 3,
pp. 68-74.
Sullivan, P. (1999), Profiting from intellectual capital, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 3
No. 2, pp. 132-43.
Teece, D.J. (1998), Capturing value from knowledge assets, California Management Review,
Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 55-79.
Teece, D.J., Pisano, G.P. and Shuen, A. (1997), Dynamic capabilities and strategic management,
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 18 No. 7, pp. 509-33.
Toffler, A. (1990), Powershift: Knowledge, Wealth and Violence at the Edge of the 21st Century,
Bantam Books, New York, NY.
Wiig, K.M. (1994), Knowledge Management: The Central Management Focus for
Intelligent-Acting Organizations, Schema Press, Arlington, TX.
Wiig, K.M. (1997), Knowledge management: where did it come from and where will it go?,
Journal of Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 1-14.
Wong, K.Y. and Aspinwall, E. (2005), An empirical study of the important factors for
knowledge-management adoption in the SME sector, Journal of Knowledge Management,
Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 64-82.
Yin, R. (1994), Case Study Research, Design and Methods, 2nd ed., Sage, London.

About the authors

Ahmed Belaid Kridan is a Lecturer at El-Fateh University, Faculty of Economic and Political
Science, Tripoli, Libya. E-mail: KRIDAN2001@hotmail.com
Jack Goulding is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Salford, UK, and Director of Organisational
Development. Gouldings teaching and research interests embrace organisational learning, strategic
management, and IT strategy development. E-mail: j.s.goulding@salford.ac.uk.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints