NEU Grand Library | TRNC Library


	NEU GRAND LIBRARY Opening Hours: Monday-Saturday, 08:00-20:00 \| E-mail: library@neu.edu.tr

You are not logged in

Show Basket

Home

Advanced Search

Back

Add to Basket

Brief display

MARC Display

Reserve

Knowledge Management Revisited: An Empirical Test on the 'Discussion Group' within the Social Media (Sağsan, Mustafa,)

Bibliographical information (record 265033)

Knowledge Management Revisited: An Empirical Test on the 'Discussion Group' within the Social Media
Author:	Sağsan, Mustafa, Search Author in Amazon Books
Publisher:	Academıc Conferences Ltd,
ISBN:	978-1-906638-70-2
Edition:	2010.
Classification:	HD30.2

Detailed notes

- http://academic-conferences.org/pdfs/ECKM_2010_Abstract_booklet.pdf

- Although knowledge management emerged during 1990s as a new and young interdisciplinary field, it is criticized by some executives and scholars in the social media and in the literature nowadays. This paper aims at reviewing the future of knowledge management by considering both the discussions that are initiated by the executives, who are the member of "Knowledge Management Experts" discussion group in the social media and the critiques which are made by the scholars. The scenario of discussion has been started in the title of "If the term knowledge management could get a do-over what would you call the discipline?" in the group and 295 opinions/comments were collected with different titles and organizations of the members. In order to understand the future of knowledge management within the frame of this discussion group/forum, the members' discourses were analyzed by considering their title and the map was drawn regarding to understanding the perception of knowledge management as a discipline in this study. In order to categorize data from the discussion group, the theoretical background of the paper rely on the knowledge management paradigms which was developed by Sagsan's (2009) study that is called humanist paradigm, inter/intra organizational paradigm, technological paradigm and socio-technical paradigm. The results indicate that most of the participants support strongly the term of "knowledge management" as a discipline and science and they believe that KM do not need to be labeled as well as they agree with KM is a discipline or science one hand, and there is a gap between academics/educators and practitioners in terms of knowledge management education on the other.