Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide a holistic picture of how and to what extent Cohen and Levinthal’s (1990) seminal article on absorptive capacity was used in knowledge management (KM) and intellectual capital (IC) research from 1990 to 2013. Design/methodology/approach – In this paper, 186 articles extracted from eight KM and IC journals were reviewed by conducting both content and text analyses. To facilitate research comparison, content analysis followed the method used by Roberts et al. (2012) and thus was based on categories, conceptualizations, levels of analysis and, additionally, temporal evolution of absorptive capacity from 1990 to 2013 was looked at. Text analysis was performed to identify major research themes developing the absorptive capacity construct. Findings – Finding showed that absorptive capacity was largely underdeveloped in the KM and IC fields. KM, knowledge transfer and innovation were the top three research areas investigating absorptive capacity in the KM and IC fields. Research limitations/implications – This study had limitations related to time frame, covering a period from April 1990 to November 2013, and accessibility of articles due to specific restrictions in journal subscriptions. Originality/value – This paper is a first attempt to review absorptive capacity in KM and IC research. It represented a primary reference for those interested to research absorptive capacity in the KM and IC fields.

International audiencePurpose The purpose of this paper is to assess the role of artifacts in the knowledge management field in the past 18 years (1997-2015) and to identify directions for future research. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted a systematic literature review of 101 articles published in seven journals retrieved from EBSCO and Google Scholar online research databases. The framework for analysis included 13 codes, i.e. author(s), title, year of publication, typology, theoretical lens, categorizations, methods for empirical work, relevancy, level of analysis, keywords, findings, research themes and future research directions. Codes were analyzed using qualitative and quantitative methods. Findings The findings lacked cumulativeness and consistency in the current knowledge management debate. Empirical works outnumbered conceptual contributions by two to one, and the majority of papers focused at the organizational level of analysis. Knowledge management systems, knowledge sharing and digital archives were the major research themes connected to artifacts, together with other closely aligned concepts such as learning and online learning, knowledge transfer and knowledge creation. Research limitations/implications This study has temporal and contextual limitations related to covered time span (18 years) and journals’ subscription restrictions. Originality/value This paper is a first attempt to systematically review the role of artifacts in knowledge management research and therefore it represents a primary reference in the knowledge management field. It provides directions to future theoretical and empirical studies and suggestions to managerial practices

Is organizational innovation always a good thing? When is innovation negative? What are the damaging effects of innovation? In this article, it is argued that innovation has negative impacts on organizational performance when the newly introduced knowledge is not compatible with an organization's prior knowledge. In this instance, an organization may experience knowledge loss or organizational dysfunctions, such as avoidance, resistance, struggle, alteration, and conversion processes. To avoid the negative impacts of innovation, we suggest that organizations should first recognize the incompatibility between the new knowledge and prior knowledge and then reformulate the newly introduced knowledge. Implications for theory and research are offered as well as suggestions for practice.

Purpose The purpose of this study is to investigate absorptive capacity and dynamic capabilities dilemma in high dynamic market IT small medium enterprises (SMEs). Absorptive capacity and dynamic capabilities have a conflict in theoretical stance. Those in favor of dynamic capabilities regard absorptive capacity as a part of dynamic capabilities, and there are many arguments regarding treating absorptive capacity as a part of dynamic capabilities. One major deficit of dynamic capabilities is that it requires adjusting the firm’s dynamic resources when responding to change, requiring some investment and time. Thus, dynamic capabilities then have a problem in instantaneously responding to a highly dynamic market. With the requirement to adjust organizational resources, absorptive capacity, as a part of dynamic capabilities, cannot have direct impact on a firm’s performance. Design/methodology/approach To show that absorptive capacity, by itself, can have a direct impact on a firm’s performance in a highly dynamic market, quantifiable variables are identified to measure the level of effort in developing absorptive capacity. The relationships between the absorptive capacity development effort and the firm’s financial performance is then explored and evaluated. Findings It is confirmed that absorptive capacity in a high dynamic market such as IT SMEs have direct and positive impact to the firm’s financial performance, without having to configure its resource to interact with changes. Originality/value The study discusses the paradoxical dilemma of the role of absorptive capacity under the light of dynamic capability. The finding indicates that in high dynamic market when the spontaneous respond to market change is crucial to firm's survival, absorptive capacity can direly deliver the result to leverage the firm's performance without having to reconfigure its resources as indicated in the theoretical stance of dynamic capability.

Purpose This paper aims to evaluate how managers influence accidental and intentional organizational forgetting, i.e. knowledge depreciation, knowledge loss and unlearning. Design/methodology/approach The literature was reviewed based on predetermined search terms to identify peer-reviewed articles published in English and available in full-text format from the EBSCOhost and Google Scholar databases. Empirical and theoretical contributions were included. Additional articles, books and book chapters were manually selected and included based on recent reviews and syntheses of organizational forgetting work. Findings Findings revealed that managers contributed to preventing accidental knowledge depreciation and loss and preserving organizational memory. With respect to intentional forgetting, findings revealed contradictory positions: on the one hand, managers contributed to the disbandment of existing beliefs and frames of reference, but on the other hand, they preserved existing knowledge and power structures. Research limitations/implications The study was limited by the accessibility of subscribed journals and databases, research scope and time span. Practical implications This paper provides useful guidelines to managers who need to reduce the disruptive effects of accidental forgetting or plan intentional forgetting, i.e. managed unlearning. Originality/value This paper represents a first attempt to review and define the influence of managers on organizational forgetting.