Validating and documenting a new knowledge management system philosophy: a case based on the ISO 30401:2018-KMS standard

References

• Baskerville, R., Baiyere, A., Gregor, S., Hevner, A., & Rossi, M. (2018). Design science research contributions: Finding a balance between artifact and theory. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 19(5), 358–376. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00495
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baskerville, R. L., & Pries-Heje, J. (2019). Projectability in design science research. Journal of Information Theoretical and Applied, 20(1), 3. https://aisel.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1750&context=jitta.
   Google Scholar
• Batten, D. F. (2000). Discovering artificial economics: How agents learn and economies evolve. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Bedford, D. A. (2013). Knowledge management education and training in academic institutions in 2012. Journal of Information & Knowledge Management, 12(4), 1350029. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219649213500299
   Google Scholar
• Beinhocker, E. D. (2006). The origin of wealth: Evolution, complexity, and the radical remaking of economics. Harvard Business Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bergstra, J. A., & Burgess, M. (2021). Promise theory and the alignment of context, processes, types, and transforms. Transmathematica, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.36285/tm.43
   Google Scholar
• Bhatt, S. (2016). How digital communication technology shapes markets: Redefining competition, building cooperation. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Bratianu, C., & Andriessen, D. (2008). Knowledge as energy: A metaphorical analysis. ECKM.
   Google Scholar
• Bratianu, C. (2019). Exploring knowledge entropy in organizations. Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, 7(3), 353–366. https://doi.org/10.25019/MDKE/7.3.05
   Google Scholar
• Bratianu, C., & Bejinaru, R. (2019). The theory of knowledge fields: A thermodynamics approach. Systems, 7(2), 20. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems7020020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brix, J. (2017). Exploring knowledge creation processes as a source of organizational learning: A longitudinal case study of a public innovation project. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 33(2), 113–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2017.05.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgess, M. (2015). Thinking in promises: Designing systems for cooperation. O’Reilly Media.
   Google Scholar
• Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110(2), 349–399. https://doi.org/10.1086/421787
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bush, V. (1945). As we may think. The Atlantic Monthly, 176(1), 101–108. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1945/07/as-we-may-think/303881/.
   Google Scholar
• Cabitza, F., Simone, C., & Cornetta, D. (2015). Sensitizing concepts for the next community-oriented technologies: Shifting focus from social networking to convivial artifacts. The Journal of Community Informatics, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.15353/joci.v11i2.2831
   Google Scholar
• Cantner, U., & Vannuccini, S. (2012). A new view of general purpose technologies. Jena Economic Research Papers, Jena, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Carvajal-Pérez, D., Araud, A., Chaperon, V., Le Masson, P., & Weil, B. (2018). Generative heritage: Driving generativity through knowledge structures in creative industries. lessons from cuisine. 15th International Design Conference.
   Google Scholar
• Date, C. J. (2006). An introduction to database systems. Pearson Education India.
   Google Scholar
• Dresch, A., Lacerda, D. P., & Miguel, P. A. C. (2015). A distinctive analysis of case study, action research and design science research. Revista Brasileira de Gestão de Negócios, 17, 1116–1133. https://www.scielo.br/j/rbgn/a/Tx8469yFmpqVxZWRyCMs5cw/?format=pdf&lang=en.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Earl, M. (2001). Knowledge management strategies: Toward a taxonomy. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 215–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2001.11045670.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eck, A., & Uebernickel, F. (2016). Untangling generativity: Two perspectives on unanticipated change produced by diverse actors. ECIS. Boğaziçi University, Istanbul. https://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/248246/
   Google Scholar
• Erikson, E. (1950). Childhood and society. New York. Norton
   Google Scholar
• Garon, J. M. (2011). Mortgaging the meme: Financing and managing disruptive innovation. Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property, 10(7), iii. https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1173&context=njtip
   Google Scholar
• Girard, J., & Ribière, V. (2016). Mapping the future of KM through earl’s KM taxonomy lens. Online Journal of Applied Knowledge Management, 4(1), 180–191. https://doi.org/10.36965/OJAKM.2016.4(1)180-191
   Google Scholar
• Grant, K. (2011). Knowledge management: An enduring but confusing fashion. Leading Issues in Knowledge Management, 2, 1–26. https://www.academic-publishing.org/index.php/ejkm/article/view/925/888.
   Google Scholar
• Gupta, S., & Lehmann, D. R. (2005). Managing customers as investments: The strategic value of customers in the long run. Pearson Education India.
   Google Scholar
• Heisig, P. (2009). Harmonisation of knowledge management–comparing 160 KM frameworks around the globe. Journal of Knowledge Management, 13(4), 4–31. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270910971798
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science in information systems research. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 28(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148625
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hughes, J. (2012). On the origin of tepees. Oneworld Publications.
   Google Scholar
• ISO.org. (2015). ISO 9000:2015(en), Quality management systems—Fundamentals and vocabulary.
   Google Scholar
• ISO.org. (2018). ISO 30401:2018(en), Knowledge management systems—Requirements.
   Google Scholar
• Johri, A., & Pal, J. (2012). Capable and convivial design (CCD): A framework for designing information and communication technologies for human development. Information Technology for Development, 18(1), 61–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2011.643202
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jovanovic, B., & Rousseau, P. L. (2005). General purpose technologies. In Handbook of economic growth (Vol. 1, pp. 1181–1224). Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Kaiser, A. (2017). Towards a knowledge-based theory of developing sustainable visions: The theory wave. Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 4495–4504.
   Google Scholar
• Kanengisser, D. (2014). How ideas change and how they change institutions: A memetic theoretical framework. 2014 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, D.C., 2014 August 28-31.
   Google Scholar
• Kano, N. (2001). Life cycle and creation of attractive quality. Proceedings of the 4th QMOD Conference, Linkoping, Sweden, (Scientific Research Publishing Inc.), 12–14. https://www.scirp.org/(S(351jmbntvnsjt1aadkposzje))/reference/ReferencesPapers.aspx?ReferenceID=1750974.
   Google Scholar
• Koltko-Rivera, M. E. (2006). Rediscovering the later version of maslow’s hierarchy of needs: Self-transcendence and opportunities for theory, research, and unification. Review of General Psychology, 10(4), 302. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.10.4.302
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kucharska, W. (2017). Relationships between trust and collaborative culture in the context of tacit knowledge sharing. Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, 13(4), 61–78. https://doi.org/10.7341/20171344
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kucharska, W., & Bedford, D. A. (2019). Knowledge sharing and organizational culture dimensions: Does job satisfaction matter?. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 17(1), 1–18. https://academic-publishing.org/index.php/ejkm/article/view/1127/1090.
   Google Scholar
• Kudryavtsev, D., & Sadykova, D. (2019). Towards architecting a knowledge management system: Requirements for an ISO compliant framework. In J. Gordijn, W. Guédria, & H. A. Proper (Eds.), The practice of enterprise modeling (pp. 36–50). Springer International Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Levy, P. (2011). The semantic sphere 1. Wiley New York.
   Google Scholar
• Loon, M. (2019). Knowledge management practice system: Theorising from an international meta-standard. Journal of Business Research, 94(C), 432–441. Elsevier https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.11.022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mintzberg, H. (2005). Developing theory about the development of theory. Great Minds in Management: The Process of Theory Development, 355–372. https://mintzberg.org/sites/default/files/article/download/developing_theory_about_the_development_of_theory_jan_2014.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Mostert, M. (2012). Systemic leadership learning: Learning to lead in the era of complexity. Knowres Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Mynatt, E. D., O’day, V. L., Adler, A., & Ito, M. (1998). Network communities: Something old, something new, something borrowed. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 7(1–2), 123–156. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008688205872
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen, M. (2012). Reinventing discovery: The new era of networked science. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Noble, H., & Heale, R. (2019). Triangulation in research, with examples. Royal College of Nursing.
   Google Scholar
• Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., & Konno, N. (2000). SECI, Ba and leadership: A unified model of dynamic knowledge creation. Long Range Planning, 33(1), 5–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-6301(99)00115-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Raghallaigh, P., Sammon, D., & Murphy, C. (2011). The design of effective theory. Systems, Signs & Actions, 5(1), 117–132. https://www.sysiac.org/uploads/SySiAc2011-ORaghallaigh.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Pawlowsky, P., Pflugfelder, N. S., & Wagner, M. H. (2021). The ISO 30401 knowledge management systems standard–a new framework for value creation and research?. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 22(3), 506–527. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-07-2020-0256
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peffers, K., Rothenberger, M., Tuunanen, T., & Vaezi, R. (2012). Design science research evaluation. International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems, 398–410.
   Google Scholar
• Pirolli, P., & Card, S. (2005). The sensemaking process and leverage points for analyst technology as identified through cognitive task analysis. Proceedings of International Conference on Intelligence Analysis, 5, 2–4.
   Google Scholar
• Pollard, D. (2008). PKM: A bottom-up approach to knowledge management. Knowledge Management in Practice: Connections and Context, 95–109.
   Google Scholar
• Popper, K. (1978). Three worlds: The tanner lecture on human values: Delivered at the university of Michigan. The Tanner Lectures, Humanities Center, University of Utah:. (accessed on 27 November 2021) https://tannerlectures.utah.edu/_resources/documents/a-to-z/p/popper80.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Rahimi, E. (2015). A design framework for personal learning environments [PhD Thesis]. Ph. D. thesis, Delft University of Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Rylander, A. (2009). Design thinking as knowledge work: Epistemological foundations and practical implications. Design Management Journal, 4(1), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1942-5074.2009.00003.x
   Google Scholar
• Schiuma, G., & Carlucci, D. (2015). The next generation of knowledge management: Mapping-based assessment models. Knowledge Management and Organizational Learning, In Ettore Bolisani & Meliha Handzic (Eds.), Advances in Knowledge Management, 127, 197–214, Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-09501-1_9
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, U., & Butchart, B. A. H. (2014). Making personal knowledge management part and parcel of higher education programme and services portfolios. The Journal of the World Universities Forum, 6(4), 87–103. https://doi.org/10.18848/1835-2030/CGP/v06i04/59518
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, U. (2015). Towards a world heritage of memes repository for tracing ideas, tailoring knowledge assets and tackling opportunity divides: Supporting a novel personal knowledge management concept. The International Journal of Technology, Knowledge, and Society, 10(1), 25–44. https://doi.org/10.18848/1832-3669/CGP/v10/56516
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, U. (2016a). Design science research for personal knowledge management system development—revisited. Informing Science, 19(1), 345–379. https://doi.org/10.28945/3566
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, U. (2016b). Personal knowledge management for development (PKM4D) framework and its application for people empowerment. Procedia Computer Science, 99, 64–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2016.09.101
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, U. (2016c). Redefining knowledge management education with the support of personal knowledge management devices. In V. L. Uskov, R. J. Howlett, & L. C. Jain (Eds.), Smart education and e-learning 2016 (pp. 515–525). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39690-3_46
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, U. (2016d). Tools for exploration and exploitation capability: Towards a co-evolution of organizational and personal knowledge management systems. The International Journal of Knowledge, Culture, and Change Management: Annual Review, 15(1), 23–47. https://doi.org/10.18848/1447-9524/CGP/23-47
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, U., & Saadé, R. G. (2017). Taking on opportunity divides via smart educational and personal knowledge management technologies. ICEL 2017 - Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on e-Learning, 11. (accessed on 27 November 2021) https://books.google.co.bw/books?id=2R8zDwAAQBAJ
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, U. (2017a). Devising enabling spaces and affordances for personal knowledge management system design. Informing Science, 20, 63–82.https://doi.org/10.28945/3743
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, U. (2017b). The logic of use and functioning of personal KM-supported experience management. Wissensmanagement 2017: CEUR Workshop Proceedings (CEUR-WS), 1821, 62–77. (accessed on 27 November 2021) http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1821/
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, U. (2018a). Rationalizing a personalized conceptualization for the digital transition and sustainability of knowledge management using the SVIDT method. Sustainability, 10(3), 839. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030839
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmitt, U. (2018b). Supporting the sustainable growth of SMEs with content- and collaboration-based personal knowledge management systems. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emerging Economies, 4(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/2393957517739773
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, U. (2019a). Designing decentralized knowledge management systems to effectuate individual and collective generative capacities. Kybernetes, 49(1), 22–46. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-03-2019-0215
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmitt, U. (2019b). Decentralizing knowledge management: Affordances and impacts. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 17(2), 114‑130. (accessed on 27 November 2021, https://academic-publishing.org/index.php/ejkm/article/view/1135
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, U. (2019c). Interoperability of managing knowledge and learning processes for sustainable e-education. 2019 Conference on Next Generation Computing Applications (NextComp), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/NEXTCOMP.2019.8883671
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, U. (2019d). Knowledge management decentralization as a disruptive innovation and general-purpose-technology. Proceedings of the 20th European Conference on Knowledge Management, 2, 923–932. (accessed on 27 November 2021) https://books.google.co.bw/books?id=G3-3DwAAQBAJ
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, U., & Gill, T. G. (2020). Gifts, contexts, means, and ends differing: informing task scenarios to serve knowledge workers’ needs in dynamic complex settings. Informing Science: The International Journal of an Emerging Transdiscipline, 23, 119–145. https://doi.org/10.28945/4667
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, U. (2020a). (Neg)Entropic scenarios affecting the wicked design spaces of knowledge management systems. Entropy, 22(2), 169. https://doi.org/10.3390/e22020169
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmitt, U. (2020b). Systems dynamics and activity-based modeling to blueprint generative knowledge management systems. International Journal of Modeling and Optimization, 10(6), 170–177. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJMO.2020.V10.766
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, U. (2020c). Scalability of generative knowledge management systems: Designing for individuals’ and institutions’ mutual benefit. Kybernetes, 50(10), 2701–2725. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-05-2020-0324.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmitt, U. (2021a). Projectability and heritage management of design knowledge: A grass-roots artefact perspective of a longitudinal research project for knowledge management system innovation. Sustainability, 13(23), 13033. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmitt, U. (2021b). Reframing a novel decentralized knowledge management concept as a desirable vision: As we may realize the memex. Sustainability, 13(7), 4038. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13074038
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scholz, R. W. (2017). Digital threat and vulnerability management: The SVIDT method. Sustainability, 9(4), 554. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9040554
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shekar, S. (2021). Design knowledge management system. Amazon digital services LLC -. KDP Print US.
   Google Scholar
• Signer, B. (2010). What is wrong with digital documents? A conceptual model for structural cross-media content composition and reuse. International Conference on Conceptual Modeling, 391–404.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. (1971). Designing organizations for an information-rich world. In M. Greenberger (Ed.), Computers, communication, and the public interest. Johns Hopkins Press.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Star, S. L. (2010). This is not a boundary object: Reflections on the origin of a concept. Science, Technology & Human Values, 35(5), 601–617. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243910377624
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart, I., & Cohen, J. (1999). Figments of reality: The evolution of the curious mind. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Szostak, R., Gnoli, C., & López-Huertas, M. (2016). Interdisciplinary knowledge organization. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Sztompka, P. (2019). Trust in the moral space. In Trust in contemporary society (pp. 31–40). Koninklijke Brill NV. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004390430_004
   Google Scholar
• Usher, A. P. (1954). A history of mechanical inventions. Courier Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• Vom Brocke, J., Winter, R., Hevner, A., & Maedche, A. (2020). Special issue editorial–accumulation and evolution of design knowledge in design science research: A journey through time and space. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 21(3), 9. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00611
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiek, A., & Iwaniec, D. (2014). Quality criteria for visions and visioning in sustainability science. Sustainability Science, 9(4), 497–512. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-013-0208-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiig, K. M. (2011). The importance of personal knowledge management in the knowledge society. Personal Knowledge Management, 34.
   Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (Vol. 5). SAGE
   Google Scholar