What does the evolution of curriculum in knowledge management programs tell us about the future of the field?

Abstract

Purpose The current study aims to analyze the curriculum of selected knowledge management (KM) programs at universities in the USA, Europe, Australia and Asia within current and historical contexts to understand the scope and nature of the requirements in KM programs. By comparing the results from programs, a baseline understanding of what the overall requirements within these programs has been developed. This may provide benefits for the profession, as this baseline can provide a clearer understanding of the skills and knowledge elements that are present or absent in the current academic programs. In addition to better informing the KM community of what graduates of these programs may know, this information can provide a basis for academic program improvement and, ultimately, better use of KM in professional practice. Design/methodology/approach The basic approach in this study is a comparative analysis of curriculum in master-level programs in English that are focused on KM. In the current study, historical references to programs in KM were identified through prior research in the topic area. Current programs were identified through standard reference sources. The course titles and program descriptions for current programs are further analyzed using text analytics tools to understand the relationship of topics within and between programs. Findings The concept of KM as a distinct program of study appears to be stable but the number of programs is declining. The number of new master degree programs in KM has not significantly increased in the past 15 years, whereas many programs have been discontinued or have been reduced to the certificate/diploma level. Of the programs that exist today, we see that a greater variety in home locations of these programs which tend to imply coverage of the field is becoming increasingly diverse in its approach. Overall, it appears that the KM programs are moving toward transformation or integration with allied fields. Originality/value There has been very limited study of the curriculum within KM programs. Most of the research performed dates from 2010 or earlier. The current study adds a unique contribution to the literature by looking at earlier iterations of KM programs and compares those to the current state of the curriculum in KM programs and their successor programs in an attempt to understand how the field may be developing and changing.

“Knowledge management is not dead. It has changed its appearance. And it will continue to change”

“…Indeed, the heterogeneous nature of the domain is what creates the overlap with other domains. KM is often integrated into existing academic curricula in advanced degree programs in information science, library science, and business management schools (Cervone, 2016).…”

The next generation of knowledge management: Implications for LIS educators and professionals

“…In analyzing where the KM programs were being offered in 2001 and 2016, about half of the KM programs were in Information/Library and Information Science faculties (Cervone, 2017). The next largest home faculty for KM was Business/Management.…”

“…The next largest home faculty for KM was Business/Management. By 2016, Business/Management exceeded Information/Library and Information Science in terms of housing KM programs, with the next largest shares coming from Professional Studies and Communication Studies (Cervone, 2017). In the near future, there will probably be fewer standalone KM programs, as KM courses will be integrated into analytics, AI, and organizational development programs.…”

Business Process Management Centre of Excellence as a Source of Knowledge

“…This perspective is very important and that both individuals, as well as organizations, need to continually learn to improve their knowledge base to remain relevant (Sisson & Ryan, 2017). It is crucial to point out organizational culture which regulates two important areas from the perspective of knowledge management: readiness to collaborate and trust between employees (Girard & Ribiere, 2016;Paliszkiewicz & Koohang, 2013, Cervone, 2016Garlatti, & Massaro, 2015, Liebowitz, 2012, Liebowitz, 2016, Paliszkiewicz, Gołuchowski, & Koohang, 2015. Knowledge sharing requires human interaction, an exchange of ideas and openness (Alavi, Kayworth, & Leidner, 2005;De Long & Fahey, 2000;Wong, 2005, Heisig, 2015, De Long, & Fahey, 2000.…”