Process Capital: A Synthesis of Research and Future Prospects

Abstract

As an intangible resource, process capital represents the institutionalized knowledge and the competencies necessary for efficient value creation from the perspective of organizational infrastructure. Even though a practical relevance for its systematic assessment and development exists, there still appears to be a strong lack of basic definitions, standards, and practical methods to comprehensibly record such a complex set of information. On the basis of a structured literature review, this paper will be the first to summarize the research on process capital. The results support the assumptions that process capital is widespread in the scientific discussion and has been researched on a very interdisciplinary basis. Furthermore, research papers to date have a strong reflective focus, and few papers have addressed the development of practical concepts. Practical experience or progress reports is exceedingly rare. In addition, this paper discusses the status quo of process capital research and illustrates implications for research and practice.

A structured literature review of scientometric research of the knowledge management discipline: a 2021 update

“…these were missed in the previous study and were included in the analyzed data set) and 167 to the period from September 2012 to August 2019 (inclusive). Note that one of the newly discovered papers that was omitted by Serenko (2013) (Torugsa and O'Donohue, 2016), the role of library and information science (LIS) in KM (Agarwal and Islam, 2018), KM in franchising (Iddy and Alon, 2019), process capital (Matthies, 2014), knowledge commercialization (Biranvand et al, 2017), and knowledge sharing, exchange and transfer (Chou and Tang, 2014). In total, 11% of studies were conducted in the context of a single journal or conference (Barik and Jena, 2013) using both KM and non-KM outlets (Bedford and Bekbalaeva, 2018;Potgieter, 2018).…”

“…Even though knowledge sharing and transfer topics topped the list again (Kennedy and Burford, 2013;Costa and Monteiro, 2016;Ferguson, 2016;Fteimi et al, 2019), other popular themes signaled the breadth and further advancement of KM research. Examples of popular and growing research streams include communities of practice (Bolisani and Scarso, 2014), the consequences of knowledge spillover, loss and leakage (Ferenhof, 2016), knowledge-based urban development (Edvardsson et al, 2016), KM success factors (Fteimi and Lehner, 2018), public sector KM (Jussila et al, 2017), KM in project management (Cabral et al, 2014;Handzic and Durmic, 2015;Sareminia et al, 2016), adoption, use and diffusion of KM systems (Matayong and Mahmood, 2013), process capital (Matthies, 2014), social media for knowledge sharing (Sarka and Ipsen, 2017), the role of KM in innovation (Leon and Bolisani, 2016) and the intersection of KM and IT (Iskandar et al, 2017;Khan and Vorley, 2017;Usai et al, 2018). KM also includes knowledge-based development (Akude and Grunewald, 2014) and organizational learning (Song et al, 2014;Adz ˇi c, 2018;Castaneda et al, 2018) research streams, and it is closely connected to IC topics (Pereira and Machado, 2019).…”

Income Diversification and Performance: Should banks trade

“…The theoretical foundation of income diversification is Markowitz (1952) Modern Portfolio Theory. The theory postulates that banks can reduce income volatility and improve overall financial performance by engaging in a range of income generating activities (Matthies, 2014). Banks diversify their income by venturing into non-lending activities such as investment banking, advisory, brokerage and underwriting (Saunders et al, 2016).…”

Building models of product development processes: An integrative approach to managing organizational knowledge

“…Digitizing and “mapping the genome” of PD work holds great potential for improving our understanding and management of it, especially when the “genes” of previous, effective projects and programs are highly instructive and in danger of being lost. Practitioner terminology such as “process assets” and “process capital” reveals the imputed value of organizational process information . However, many investments in such efforts fail to provide the desired returns: many process modeling and knowledge management efforts seem to fizzle out without much long‐term benefit or impact.…”