Global ranking of knowledge management and intellectual capital academic journals: 2017 update

Serenko, Alexander; Bontis, Nick

doi:10.1108/jkm-11-2016-0490

Cited by 82 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The top three journals in terms of the number of articles in the list are Journal of Supply Chain Management (12), Journal of Operations Management (7), and International Journal of Production Economics (7). Comparing the KM journal list compiled and ranked by Serenko and Bontis (), we find that none of the journals in our list is from the KM discipline.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 76%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A knowledge management perspective of supplier development: Evidence from supply chain scholars and consultants

Liang

Ellis

Holsapple

2018

Knowl Process Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As a critical supply chain management strategy and topic, supplier development has been intensively used in industries and actively studied in academia. A recent comprehensive review indicates an increasing interest in incorporating knowledge management in supply chain management, but supplier development has been rarely researched from the perspective of knowledge management. This study incorporates the knowledge chain theory to supplier development and investigates the importance of each knowledge management activity in supplier development. Using the survey data from a sample of active scholars and consultants who are committed to supplier development, this study supports the significant role of knowledge management in supplier development. Specifically, these scholars and consultants suggest that both buying and supplying firms should at least moderately conduct each knowledge management activity in supplier development in order to achieve desired outcomes. We also find that the roles of buying and supplying firms vary across 9 knowledge management activities. In addition, our respondents indicate that the definition of supplier development raised based on the the knowledge chain theory is at least moderately successful in all the evaluation criteria. Based on the quantitative and qualitative evidence from our respondents, this study revises the definition slightly to make it more comprehensive and clear. This study contributes to extant research by confirming the necessity of implementing knowledge management activities in supplier development, validating the heterogeneous roles of knowledge management activities in supplier development, and raising a revised definition of supplier development from the knowledge management perspective.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 76%

“…The 107 articles were published in 60 journals. Table 2 lists Applying an organization's K to produce organizational outputs for release into the environment KM journal list compiled and ranked by Serenko and Bontis (2017), we find that none of the journals in our list is from the KM discipline.…”

Section: Participant Identificationmentioning

confidence: 98%

A knowledge management perspective of supplier development: Evidence from supply chain scholars and consultants

Liang

Ellis

Holsapple

2018

Knowl Process Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…KM is regarded as a fast-growing discipline in academia (Serenko & Bontis, 2017). However, varying definitions have highlighted different thoughts towards the meaning of knowledge management.…”

Section: Knowledge Management In the Arab Regionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of knowledge management processes on business performance: Evidence from Kuwait

Dženopoljac

Alasadi

Zaim

et al. 2018

Knowl Process Manag

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this research study is to investigate the relationship between knowledge management (KM) processes and the level of business performance of organizations in Kuwait. The research utilized a survey that was administered to 500 employees of 139 private and government companies in Kuwait. Tests of validity and reliability confirmed the use of the survey instrument whereas factor analysis revealed 4 main factors whose impact on performance was assessed. The research results revealed that all 4 KM processes examined (i.e., knowledge generation and development, codification and storage, transfer and sharing, and use and evaluation) have a positive and significant impact on perceived business performance. Additionally, the research revealed that KM processes have the highest impact on innovation performance. The limitation of this study is mainly related to the limited geographical scope of the research, because the survey covered only companies from Kuwait. The originality of the research comes from geographical area covered. Virtually, no empirical research has been undertaken in area of knowledge management in Kuwait, as an oil‐dependent country.

show abstract

“…The first data set was collected by Serenko and Bontis (), who developed a ranking of 27 peer‐reviewed KM/IC journals by means of a survey of 482 KM/IC researchers. Serenko and Bontis randomly selected up to 110 authors from each of the ranked outlets, 2,578 in total.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A critical evaluation of expert survey‐based journal rankings: The role of personal research interests

Serenko

Bontis

2017

Asso for Info Science & Tech

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By using the data from two recent survey‐based rankings of knowledge management / intellectual capital and eHealth journals, this study tests the impact of personal research interests of journal raters on their ranking scores. The rationale is that raters assign higher scores to journals that cater to their area of expertise because they are more familiar with them. The results indicate the existence of raters’ bias toward the journals focusing on their preferred areas of interest, but this bias does not uniformly apply across all research topics. In some subdomains, such as intellectual capital, this bias may be very strong, whereas in others, such as soft‐side knowledge management research, it may be nonexistent. Although management eHealth researchers rate management‐focused journals higher than their clinical‐centered counterparts, this bias does not exist among scholars favoring clinical topics. While this limitation is not fatal, the results from expert‐survey journal ranking studies should be interpreted with caution.

show abstract

Global ranking of knowledge management and intellectual capital academic journals: 2017 update

Cited by 82 publications

References 36 publications

A knowledge management perspective of supplier development: Evidence from supply chain scholars and consultants

A knowledge management perspective of supplier development: Evidence from supply chain scholars and consultants

Impact of knowledge management processes on business performance: Evidence from Kuwait

A critical evaluation of expert survey‐based journal rankings: The role of personal research interests

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About