IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aae/journl/v13y2017i3p29-69.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Knowledge Concept Map: Structured Concept Analysis from Systematic Literature Review

Author

Listed:
  • Philip Sisson

    (The George Washington University)

  • Julie J.C.H. Ryan

    (National Defense Institute University)

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to present a mental model of knowledge as a concept map as an input to knowledge management (KM) investigations. This article’s extended knowledge concept map can serve as a resource where the investigation, development, or application of knowledge would be served with a broad mental model of knowledge. Previously unrelated concepts are related; knowledge concepts can sometimes be expressed as a range, i.e., certainty related states: view, opinion, sentiment, persuasion, belief, and conviction. Extrathesis is identified as a potential skill level higher than synthesis, and associated with the concepts: discovery, institution, insight (the event), revelation, or illumination that precedes innovation. Qualitative methods were used to gather and document concepts. System engineering and object analysis methods were applied to define and relate concepts. However, the theoretical sampling and theoretical saturation methods applied do not guarantee all appropriate concepts have been identified. Given the breadth, depth, and dimensionality of concepts of knowledge, later researchers may add additional concepts. This article provides evidence of additional things people know, an alternative to psychology’s acquaintanceship, understanding and placement of newer categorizations of knowledge in relation to older ones, and suggests that ranges for knowledge terms exist. This article extends the 2015 paper on this topic by: 1) taking a deeper look into epistemological terms and relationships, 2) providing contextual definitions, 3) suggesting extrathesis as an idea beyond synthesis, 4) updating the concept map; and 5) providing new insight on the overloaded knows including adding an eleventh know. It provides a much more solid basis for KM investigations than typical presentations, providing a broad understanding of knowledge that is beneficial.

Suggested Citation

  • Philip Sisson & Julie J.C.H. Ryan, 2017. "A Knowledge Concept Map: Structured Concept Analysis from Systematic Literature Review," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 13(3), pages 29-69.
    • Handle: RePEc:aae:journl:v:13:y:2017:i:3:p:29-69
    DOI: 10.7341/20171332
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://jemi.edu.pl/uploadedFiles/file/all-issues/vol13/issue3/JEMI_Vol13_Issue3_2017_Article2.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.7341/20171332?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. C.W. Holsapple & K.D. Joshi, 2004. "A formal knowledge management ontology: Conduct, activities, resources, and influences," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 55(7), pages 593-612, May.
    2. Alex Bennet & David Bennet, 2014. "Knowledge, Theory and Practice in Knowledge Management: Betweeen Associative Pattering and Context-Rich Action," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 10(1), pages 7-55.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Robert Joseph Skovira, 2012. "Japanese Way, Western Way: Two Narratives of KnowledgeManagement," Knowledge and Learning: Global Empowerment; Proceedings of the Management, Knowledge and Learning International Conference 2012,, International School for Social and Business Studies, Celje, Slovenia.
    2. Kristin Spieler & Velibor Bobo Kovac, 2017. "Individual, Technological, and Organizational Predictors of Knowledge Sharing in the Norwegian Context," International Journal of Management, Knowledge and Learning, International School for Social and Business Studies, Celje, Slovenia, vol. 6(1), pages 5-26.
    3. Cletus Helen Eboh, 2019. "Evaluation of the Conceptual Theories, Elements, and Processes of Knowledge Management in Modern Day Organisations," HOLISTICA – Journal of Business and Public Administration, Sciendo, vol. 10(1), pages 37-54, April.
    4. Grace Orinda & Dr. Patrick Limo & Joel Chepkwony, 2020. "Organizational Learning and employee performance. An Indirect Effect Model of Employee Loyalty," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 4(9), pages 75-84, September.
    5. Alhawari, Samer & Karadsheh, Louay & Nehari Talet, Amine & Mansour, Ebrahim, 2012. "Knowledge-Based Risk Management framework for Information Technology project," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 50-65.
    6. Finn Olav Sveen & Eliot Rich & Matthew Jager, 2007. "Overcoming organizational challenges to secure knowledge management," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 9(5), pages 481-492, November.
    7. Detlef Seese & Christof Weinhardt & Frank Schlottmann (ed.), 2008. "Handbook on Information Technology in Finance," International Handbooks on Information Systems, Springer, number 978-3-540-49487-4, November.
    8. K. D. Joshi & Lei Chi & Avimanyu Datta & Shu Han, 2010. "Changing the Competitive Landscape: Continuous Innovation Through IT-Enabled Knowledge Capabilities," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 472-495, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aae:journl:v:13:y:2017:i:3:p:29-69. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Anna Ujwary-Gil (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://fundacjacognitione.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.