There has been significant growth in knowledge-based school of thought, which shows that the yield and retention of knowledge can have a positive effect on firm performance (In Mattia & Scott, 1999). To manage the company's intangible assets with leverage for these benefits are considered a core capability. Knowledge management (KM) has aimed at capturing, integrating and using existing organizational knowledge and consequently creating a knowledge asset that can be a source of sustainable competitive advantage in the long run (Brooking, 1999; Havens & Knapp, 1999). Revolution in KM come with the advent of technology and there have been misunderstandings linking IT with MI, although only facilitate the process (Papers4you.com, 2006).
The literature divides knowledge into two main categories depending on the nature to be codified for use in the KM system. Structured and systematic knowledge that can be described in a formal language and easily communicated and shared through formal means qualify for this kind of explicit knowledge (Elizabeth, 2001). It was decided that the knowledge is easier to arrange in the form of a database and viewed as a basic resource for the inherent nature of easy imitation by other organizations. Another form of knowledge that has been gained tremendous importance of collective behavior is automatic and is called tacit knowledge (Richard et al, 2001). Tacit knowledge, according to Sajjad et al (2005), consists of mental models, values, beliefs, assumptions and perceptions that are fascinated to the organization's intellectual capital. It has been suggested that tacit knowledge is clearly faced with a dichotomy that is imitated features that make it a sustainable source of competitive advantage also makes it difficult to capture and share in the organization to obtain the potential benefits.
Therefore it can be concluded that elusive asset knowledge, which provides organizations with the ability to weaken the competition also proved to be a challenge to leverage itself (Papers4you.com, 2006). Every organization should not only see 'best practices' in the field but had to adjust each culture unique approach and requirements to successfully using MI.
Blair, D.C. (2002), "Knowledge management: hype, hope, or help?", Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 53(12), 1019-1028
BROOKING, Annie (1999), "Corporate Memory: Strategies for Knowledge Management", Intellectual Capital Series London: International Thomson Business
Di Mattia, S. & Scott, I. A. (1999), "KM: hope, hype or harbinger?", Library Journal, 15 September, 122(15), p. 33
Elizabeth A. Smith, (2001), "The role of tacit and explicit knowledge in the workplace", Journal of Knowledge Management; Volume: 5 Issue: 4; 2001 Research Paper
Havens, C. & Knapp, E. (1999), "Easing into Knowledge Management, Strategy and Leadership", 27(2), p. 4
Leiponen, Aija (2006), "Managing Knowledge for Innovation: The Case of Business-to-Business Services", Journal of Product Innovation Management, May2006, Vol. 23 Issue 3, p238-258
Papers For You (2006) "P/M/440. Tools of knowledge management", Available from http://www.coursework4you.co.uk/sprtmgt8.htm [22/06/2006]
Papers For You (2006) "P/M/325. Knowledge management: definition of the concept", Available from Papers4you.com [21/06/2006]
Richard T. Herschel, Hamid Nemati, David Steiger (2001), "Tacit to explicit knowledge conversion: knowledge exchange protocols", Journal of Knowledge Management; Volume: 5 Issue: 1; 2001 Research paper
Sajjad M. Jasimuddin, Jonathan H. Klein, Con Connell (2005), "The paradox of using tacit and explicit knowledge: Strategies to face dilemmas", Management Decision; Volume: 43 Issue: 1; 2005 Conceptual paper
Read more: http://www.articlesbase.com/management-articles/how-important-is-knowledge-management-for-businesses-40447.html#ixzz17K86bDgF\