Differences between knowledge and information management practices: empirical investigation

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216224%3A14560%2F16%3A00091724" target="_blank" >RIV/00216224:14560/16:00091724 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5220/0006053501900198" target="_blank" >http://dx.doi.org/10.5220/0006053501900198</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5220/0006053501900198" target="_blank" >10.5220/0006053501900198</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Differences between knowledge and information management practices: empirical investigation

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

In Knowledge Management (KM) discipline, the nature of KM itself has long been discussed and sometimes even its existence and meaning have been questioned. At the same time, research focusing on the difference between KM and Information Management (IM) was scarce. Therefore we tried through empirical investigation of differences between KM and IM to distinguish the KM from IM and to try to draw a distinct line between both approaches. To fulfil our goal we employed exploratory inductive qualitative research design as not many studies have tried to empirically distinguish KM from IM. For data gathering we used expert semi-structured interviews. The interviews and also results were structured according to 8 perspectives: conceptual, process, technological, organisational, implementation, human resources, economical, and administration. For each perspective, we examined the context of IM and KM and analysed, described and interpreted the differences.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Differences between knowledge and information management practices: empirical investigation

Popis výsledku anglicky

In Knowledge Management (KM) discipline, the nature of KM itself has long been discussed and sometimes even its existence and meaning have been questioned. At the same time, research focusing on the difference between KM and Information Management (IM) was scarce. Therefore we tried through empirical investigation of differences between KM and IM to distinguish the KM from IM and to try to draw a distinct line between both approaches. To fulfil our goal we employed exploratory inductive qualitative research design as not many studies have tried to empirically distinguish KM from IM. For data gathering we used expert semi-structured interviews. The interviews and also results were structured according to 8 perspectives: conceptual, process, technological, organisational, implementation, human resources, economical, and administration. For each perspective, we examined the context of IM and KM and analysed, described and interpreted the differences.

Druh

D - Stať ve sborníku

CEP obor

AE - Řízení, správa a administrativa

OECD FORD obor

—

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2016

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název statě ve sborníku

Proceedings of the 8th International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management

ISBN

9789897582035

ISSN

—

e-ISSN

—

Počet stran výsledku

9

Strana od-do

190-198

Název nakladatele

SCITEPRESS

Místo vydání

Porto

Místo konání akce

Porto

Datum konání akce

1. 1. 2016

Typ akce podle státní příslušnosti

WRD - Celosvětová akce

Kód UT WoS článku

000393154200020