Purpose-The purpose of this study is to conduct a scientometric analysis of the body of literature contained in 11 major knowledge management and intellectual capital (KM/IC) peer-reviewed journals. Design/methodology/approach-A total of 2,175 articles published in 11 major KM/IC peer-reviewed journals were carefully reviewed and subjected to scientometric data analysis techniques. Findings-A number of research questions pertaining to country, institutional and individual productivity, cooperation patterns, publication frequency, and favourite inquiry methods were proposed and answered. Based on the findings, many implications emerged that improve one's understanding of the identity of KM/IC as a distinct scientific field. Research limitations/implications-The pool of KM/IC journals examined did not represent all available publication outlets, given that at least 20 peer-reviewed journals exist in the KM/IC field. There are also KM/IC papers published in other non-KM/IC specific journals. However, the 11 journals that were selected for the study have been evaluated by Bontis and Serenko as the top publications in the KM/IC area. Practical implications-Practitioners have played a significant role in developing the KM/IC field. However, their contributions have been decreasing. There is still very much a need for qualitative descriptions and case studies. It is critically important that practitioners consider collaborating with academics for richer research projects. Originality/value-This is the most comprehensive scientometric analysis of the KM/IC field ever conducted.

No abstract