The role of cloud computing in knowledge

management for small and medium

enterprises: a systematic literature review
Minu Saratchandra and Anup Shrestha

Minu Saratchandra and Abstract

Anup Shrestha are both Purpose – Knowledge management (KM) is widely adopted by organisations to improve their
based at the School of performance and make informed decisions. Prior research has confirmed that Information Systems (IS)
Business, University of play a critical role in effective KM. The purpose of this study is to examine the existing literature on the role
Southern Queensland, of cloud-based KM systems (C-KMS) in small- and medium-sized enterprise (SMEs) by understanding its
impact on the five KM processes: knowledge acquisition, creation, storage, sharing and usage.
Toowoomba, Australia.
Design/methodology/approach – This study conducted a systematic literature review by examining 133
journal articles and 24 conference papers from 2010 to 2021 on the role of cloud computing in KM for SMEs.
Findings – This study revealed that there are numerous empirical analyses on KM processes and tools in SMEs;
however, only few studies demonstrate how the whole gamut of KM processes can adopt cloud computing in
SMEs. Therefore, SMEs are ineffective at KM with limited IS intervention. This paper offers a proposition on how
C-KMS can impact all five KM process, thereby increasing its effectiveness of KM in SMEs. This study analysed
the benefits of C-KMS that brings to SMEs in terms of availability, scalability, reliability, security and cost.
Research limitations/implications – This systematic review is restricted to certain databases
(ScienceDirect, Sage journals, Scopus and Emerald Insight) and specific IS conference proceedings to
source articles. The selection of search criteria and time frame is based on this study’s assessment and
choice. This study adds value to our understanding of the role of KM in SMEs, and it reinforces the role of cloud
computing in effectively managing knowledge in SMEs. The proposal of C-KMS for the enhancement of KM
has significant implications for SMEs to effectively use knowledge for their survival and superior performance.
Practical implications – This study suggests three practical implications. First, adopting and using
C-KMS provide a strong foundation to manage knowledge for SMEs in a cost-effective way. Second,
C-KMS improves the effectiveness of KM by increasing availability of knowledge artifacts, which in turn
aids SMEs’ growth. Third, C-KMS is useful to codify SME’s knowledge, and accordingly supports
employees to acquire and use knowledge based on their requirements.
Social implications – This study discussed C-KMS with contemporary social issues, such as the
COVID-19 pandemic challenges for SMEs and demonstrated how C-KMS can support SMEs to handle
such crises by managing knowledge effectively.
Originality/value – This research highlights the importance of the implementation of a C-KMS for the
enhancement of KM in SMEs. The review provides empirical evidence on the challenges faced by SMEs
regarding KM, as they often only have enough resources to focus on a single KM process, predominantly
knowledge sharing. Consequently, a holistic approach to KM cannot be realised by SMEs. In this context,
the findings of this study offer theoretical and practical insights into the role of cloud computing by
addressing the challenges of KM in SMEs.
Keywords Information systems, Knowledge management, Ambidexterity,
Small and medium enterprises, Cloud computing
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
Received 3 June 2021
Revised 5 September 2021 Knowledge is an essential resource of an organisation, as it offers insights into the
30 October 2021
Accepted 10 December 2021 overall functioning of an organisation for future growth and innovation. According to

PAGE 2668 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022, pp. 2668-2698, © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 1367-3270 DOI 10.1108/JKM-06-2021-0421
Davenport and Prusak (1998), organisational knowledge is embedded not only in
documents or repositories but also in an organisation’s routines, processes and practices. If
knowledge exists in isolation and cannot be accessed, it has no value for any firm; thus,
knowledge management (KM) is a critical organisational function. KM evolved within the
Information Systems (IS) discipline from the development of on-premises systems and
decision support systems to internet-based online systems and Web 2.0 collaboration tools.
More recently, “Digitisation” with Cloud, artificial intelligence (AI) and Internet of Things
(IoT)-based systems has further enhanced the capabilities of knowledge management
systems (KMS) (Choy et al., 2018). Further, IS have been represented as one of the
prominent applications researched in the KM literature, as endorsed by Pauleen and Wang
(2017).
KM and IS can jointly promote the capability of SMEs in the context of competitive
advantage, decision-making capacity and innovation (Maravilhas and Martins, 2019). While
IS has improved KM methodologies and tools (Polyakov et al., 2020), SMEs still face
challenges in establishing KM processes. SMEs typically have fewer resources, thus, they
depend on external knowledge sources such as customers, suppliers, conferences (Al-
Jabri and Al-Busaidi, 2018) and tacit knowledge (Audretsch and Belitski, 2021). Generally
considered entities without a strategy, SMEs use a range of traditional KM tools (Cerchione
and Esposito, 2017) due to their limited access to technological knowledge and qualified
staff (Calvo-Mora et al., 2016). Nevertheless, SMEs play a pivotal role in instigating
economic growth, employment and wealth creation (Lin, 2014). While SMEs encounter
several challenges in managing their knowledge (Al-Jabri and Al-Busaidi, 2018), the SME
sector remains under-researched in terms of KM studies that use IS tools (Centobelli et al.,
2019).
Cloud computing refers to widely accepted IT services that can facilitate scalability, on-
demand self-service and resource pooling to support KM in SMEs (Singh and Dhiman, 2021).
Such characteristics can generate many benefits for managing knowledge in SMEs. For
instance, the scalable storage capacity of the cloud facilitates the implementation of KM using
big data on a pay-as-you-go flexible package, so that knowledge is available on-demand
(Arias-Pérez et al., 2021). Li et al. (2021) emphasise that cloud computing should be invested
in explorative innovation to fully realise its business value. Despite these benefits, cloud
computing has not been extensively researched in the context of KM for SMEs.
SMEs are more vulnerable in competitive markets due to the presence of knowledge
constraints and ad-hoc methods to manage knowledge (Chowdhury, 2011). The KM
processes in SMEs are in their nascent stage with limited IS intervention (Al-Emran et al.,
2018). Tacitness is another important challenge, as tacit knowledge is stored in individuals’
minds and is personal rather than communal (Kucharska, 2021). SMEs tend to contemplate
that the entire KM processes are confined to knowledge sharing process (Ju nior et al.,
2020). Therefore, considering the unique characteristics of SMEs and their operational
challenges, a comprehensive study on the use of cloud computing for KM, i.e. cloud-based
KMS (C-KMS) in SMEs is necessary. The findings of such a study have the potential to
improve KM capabilities and reduce knowledge loss in SMEs. Consequently, this
systematic literature review (SLR) aimed to examine existing research on the role of cloud
computing in SMEs by exploring their existing and potential impacts on the five KM
processes: knowledge acquisition, creation, storage, sharing and usage. We also examine
how SMEs can use C-KMS to manage knowledge effectively. While there are numerous
empirical analyses on KM processes and tools in SMEs, only few studies demonstrate how
the whole gamut of KM processes can adopt cloud computing in SMEs.
To address this literature gap, this review poses the following three research questions
(RQs):
RQ1. What is the current research on the role of cloud computing in knowledge
management?

VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2669

 RQ2. How can SMEs effectively manage knowledge using cloud computing?
RQ3. What are the benefits of cloud-based KMS services to SMEs?
These RQs present answers to the role of cloud computing in the KM processes for SMEs.
Section 2 presents a literature review explaining the three key literature pillars for this study.
Section 3 demonstrates the methodology adopted for this SLR. Section 4 presents the
findings by answering the RQs. In addition, we suggest a solution for leveraging KM
efficiency in SMEs by adopting C-KMS and analysing the benefits of a proposed C-KMS
solution. Section 5 summarizes the major findings, and Section 6 demonstrates the
theoretical and practical implications of this research.

2. Literature review
Before conducting the SLR, we present a brief introduction of the three literature pillars that
underpin the motivation to conduct this research – KM, cloud computing and SMEs.

2.1 Knowledge management

KM is a prerequisite for improving the innovation and competitiveness of any enterprise
(Rashid et al., 2021). Although KM has been a discipline for nearly 25 years (Pauleen and
Wang, 2017), it lacks a common standard definition. Various scholars have used multiple
definitions in their studies. For instance, Yap and Lock (2017) define KM as the
management of explicit and tacit knowledge to meet organisational requirements. Wang
and Wang (2019) consider KM as the process that generates value for an organisation by
using its intellectual and knowledge assets. Nevertheless, there is widespread agreement
that KM is a systematic process of acquiring, creating, storing, sharing and applying
knowledge (Dalkir, 2013).
Knowledge acquisition is the initial stage of KM, when an organisational learning process
occurs through experience, observation or searching for knowledge (Huber, 1991).
Similarly, knowledge creation involves creating new explicit knowledge in the form of data
stored in any IS, whereas knowledge storage is concerned with the storage of newly
created knowledge for future use. Knowledge sharing also involves disseminating
knowledge among co-workers and relevant stakeholders (Le Dinh et al., 2013). Finally,
knowledge utilisation is defined as the use/reuse of knowledge to solve operational
problems and increase competitiveness (Alavi and Leidner, 2001). From these definitions,
we can surmise that KM involves a systematic process of identifying knowledge before the
process of understanding and codifying it for knowledge storage and sharing and its
ultimate effective use (Benitez et al., 2018). A successful organisation consistently and
efficiently manages knowledge by adopting systematic KM processes (Wee and Chua,
2013). Except for the process of knowledge acquisition and utilization, other KM processes
are considered to be directly supported by IS (Arpaci, 2017). Through this SLR, we aim to
analyse how all five KM processes are impacted by cloud computing.

2.2 Cloud computing

In 2009, a commonly agreed upon definition of cloud computing was developed by the
United States National Institute of Standards and Technology, whereby it was
conceptualized as a paradigm of technology delivery that provides IT solutions as a service
(Banerjee et al., 2011). Since that time, cloud computing services have emerged as the
backbone of many organisations’ business activities.
Prior studies have demonstrated the benefit of using cloud computing for KM, as it became
one of the suitable platforms to set up KMS (Sultan, 2013). Typically, we analyse the
benefits of cloud services through its Quality of Service (QoS) (Bouzary and Chen, 2020)
because QoS helps to convey how well cloud services meet the users’ and organisation’s

PAGE 2670 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022

needs and expectations (Kourtesis et al., 2014). QoS dimensions, such as availability,
reliability, cost, scalability and security, are valuable metrics used in cloud computing
research (Gupta et al., 2013; Wang et al., 2014; Balina et al., 2017). A C-KMS can be
evaluated using QoS dimensions to determine the impact of cloud computing in KM
functions; our research investigates this proposition.

2.3 Small- and medium-sized enterprises

In general, larger corporations have more opportunities to protect their essential knowledge
using well-established practices (Gast et al., 2019). Consequently, a rich body of literature
on KM focuses exclusively on larger organisations (Cerchione et al., 2020), while studies on
SMEs remain limited. SMEs are typically categorized based on the organization’s size,
revenue or business operations. As this study focuses on KM processes, we consider
categorizing SMEs as per the research of Cerchione and Esposito (2017), i.e. SMEs fit into
one of four categories – guidepost, exploiter, explorer and latecomer – based upon the
intensity of their use of KM tools and KM practices.
First, Guidepost SMEs understand the strategic value of KM and can explore and
intensively exploit innovative KM tools and practices. Second, Exploiter SMEs can
intensively exploit limited KM practices and tools that are at their disposal; however, they
are typically oblivious to the importance of investing resources in the field of KM. Third,
Explorer SMEs can use innovative KM tools and practices specifically dedicated to KM;
however, they cannot fully exploit their knowledge. Finally, Latecomer SMEs are unaware of
the strategic value of KM and do not use its required resources. These SME categories offer
a useful lens through which to evaluate how SMEs can improve their KM journey with the
use of IS tools.

3. Method
This study is an SLR that can identify the foci of prior research, and uncover research gaps
(Webster and Watson, 2002). Thus, this review presents existing research on “knowledge
management” and “cloud computing”. We also identified literature gaps in previous studies,
while providing opportunities for future research. The research design followed during the
SLR is illustrated in Figure 1. The design is categorized into three stages based on

Figure 1 Research design of this study

VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2671

 Kitchenham and Brereton (2013). In the first stage, we identified the purpose of the study by
focusing on KM gaps in SMEs, which led us to analyse the literature and create the three
RQs. We documented the protocol for conducting this SLR during the initial stage by
disclosing aims, objectives, search parameters and exclusion and inclusion screening
criteria. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA)
flowchart (Moher et al., 2009) was followed to select 157 relevant research articles. In the
second stage, to answer the RQs, we categorized KM processes in the articles to
understand the role of cloud computing in supporting KM in SMEs. Finally, we concluded
the review by presenting the key findings, discussions and implications.

3.1 Data sources and search process

After identifying the purpose of the study and agreeing on the protocol, a PRISMA flowchart
was created to identify and select relevant journals and conference papers. The inclusion
and exclusion criteria applied to filter the literature are shown in Table 1. The search strings
included “knowledge management” and “cloud computing” and no abbreviations were
used.

3.2 Inclusion and exclusion criteria

This review explores studies on cloud computing and KM in SMEs, published in journals
and conference proceedings from 2010 to 2021. Cloud computing was one of the major
keywords in inclusion criteria to obtain a broader field of studies related to KM in SMEs.
In this review, we investigated four databases (Scopus, Emerald Insight, ScienceDirect and
Sage journals) and six conference proceedings (Australasian Conference on Information
Systems [ACIS], International Conference on Information Systems [ICIS], Americas
Conference on Information Systems [AMCIS], HI International Conference on System
Sciences [HICSS], European Conference on Information Systems [ECIS] and Pacific Asia
Conference on Information Systems [PACIS]). More than 90,000 articles were identified
from the sources. As most of the extracted articles were based on cloud computing but did
not address KM, the advanced search options were used to include the keyword
“knowledge” in the “abstract or title field” in each database; consequently, 6,946 articles
were generated. Further, duplicate articles were eliminated to obtain 5,938 journal articles
and 299 conference proceedings, which were manually reviewed by studying their
titles and abstracts to narrow the search (n = 681) further. We then eliminated 376 articles
after applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The list was therefore truncated to 247
journals and 58 conference proceedings. This was followed by conducting an in-depth
analysis of the full text of each article to determine the match between the concept of the
article and the objectives of this review. Consequently, this generated 133 journal articles
and 24 conference proceedings.
The selection procedure is detailed in the PRISMA flowchart in Figure 2.

Table 1 Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Inclusion Exclusion

Studies conducted on SMEs Studies conducted on large firms and multi-national

corporations
Search strings on “knowledge management and Application of knowledge management or cloud
cloud computing” along with relevant information computing in a different domain
systems/technology
Only articles in English Articles not in English

PAGE 2672 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022

 Figure 2 PRISMA flowchart followed for SLR

3.3 Detailed data analysis

We identified 133 journals and 24 conference proceedings. To answer the RQs, each
journal and conference papers were carefully read and analysed by two researchers. The
details of the data analysis are outlined in the following sections.

3.3.1 Databases represented in the selected articles. From the article list, we identified that
ScienceDirect published most journals (n = 56), whereas Sage journals published the least
number of journals (n = 9). Similarly, the AMCIS had the most selected proceedings (n = 8)

VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2673

 followed by the ICIS (n = 5). The distribution of articles in each database and conference
proceedings is shown in Figure 3.
3.3.2 Outlets and publication dates of the selected articles. The Journal of Knowledge
Management (n = 18) has the highest proportion of journal articles. Regarding the number
of studies conducted in a year, a majority of studies were reported in 2020 (n = 32),
followed by 2018 (n = 24). O’Leary (2016) reported a decreasing interest rate in KM from
2012 to 2015. In contrast, our analysis shows a surge in studies during 2015 (n = 13),
although a significant downfall was observed in 2014, 2016 and 2019. Figure 4 shows the
distribution of the studies per year. The complete details of the articles are presented in
Appendix.
Based on the count of journal articles and conference proceedings (J:C) from the selected
articles in the six geographical regions, most studies were conducted in Europe (65:6),
while Italy (n = 17) had the highest number of studies in Europe. Asia (51:5) was the second
largest region, and most studies were largely focused on China (n = 20). The regions with

Figure 3 Databases and conference proceedings of the selected studies

Figure 4 Year of publication of the selected studies

Distribuon of studies per year

35 32

30
24
25 22 21
20

15 13
9 10
10 7 6 6
4 3
5

0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

PAGE 2674 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022

the lowest number of studies were South America and Africa (4:0). The USA (23:9) had the
highest number of studies in the world. Australia had the second highest number of
conference papers (n = 4). The distribution of studies reported in different regions is shown
in Figure 5.
3.3.3 Research methods of the selected studies. Various methodologies have been used in
different studies. However, most studies used surveys (n = 42) followed by case studies
(n = 36). There were 31 conceptual articles. Further details are presented in Figure 6.
However, there exists a lack of studies on action research and design science research,
demonstrating a shortage of IS (in this context: C-KMS) implementation-related or industry
problem-solving-related research.
3.3.4 Theories and frameworks of the selected studies. Several theories were used in the
studies (n = 36); however, knowledge creation theory by Nonaka (1994) was the most
widely used theory (n = 14) to support knowledge creation. The knowledge creation model
is relevant, as knowledge exists in tacit form in most SMEs. Nonaka introduced the
socialisation, externalisation, combination and internalisation (SECI) model and defined
knowledge creation as a process through which new ideas and information are generated

Figure 5 Regions where selected research studies are conducted

Figure 6 Methodologies used in the studies

Number of studies
45 42
40 36
35 31
30
25
20
15 12 10 11
10 7 6
5 2
0

VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2675

 and synthesised into knowledge in an organisation, thereby refining problems and
improving the competitive advantage of the firm.
The second most studied theory was shared by four theories: knowledge-based view
(KBV), resource-based view (RBV), knowledge management theory and ambidexterity
theory (n = 4). The RBV and KBV have great relevance in this review, as they consider
knowledge as a strategically important resource for any organisation. Knowledge
management theory explains KM as a pervasive concept affecting all aspects of
organisational functions (Torraco, 2000). Other theories and frameworks including social
exchange theory, absorptive capacity theory (n = 3), technology–organisation–environment
(TOE) framework and technology-acceptance model (n = 1) emphasise the role of
knowledge in an organisation and its utilisation for organisational benefits. Figure 7 presents
the details of theories used in the selected articles.
This review is not without limitations. As only specific databases and IS conference
proceedings were used to select the articles, they may not provide a holistic view of all
articles on C-KMS in SMEs. The selection of the search criteria and time frame is based on

Figure 7 Theories/framework used in the studies

Number of studies
Systems theory 1
Dynamic capabilies view 1
Resouce based view 4
Knowledge Based View 4
MINA Framework 1
Transacve memory systems 1
Social network theory 2
Uncertaininty Reducon theory 1
Entrainment theory 1
Structural conngency theory 1
Knowledge creaon model 14
Informaon processing theory 1
Media richness theory 1
Vector Space model 1
IT governance theory 1
Absorpve capacity theory 3
Poppers theory of knowledge 1
Psychological ownership of knowledge theory 1
Social exchange theory 3
Ambidexterity theory 4
Technology acceptance model 1
TOE Framework 1
Theory of planned behaviour 1
Triandis Theory 1
Social cognive theory 2
Theory of Knowledge Management 4
Fuzzy set theory 3
Theory of fit 1
Conngency theory 1
Social capital theory 2
Complexity Theory 1
Theory of social dilemma 1
Labour process theory 1
Adapve structuraon theory (AST) 1
Deindividualizaon theory 1
Theory of the social funcon of emoon 1
Goal Seng Theory 1
Mid-range theory 1
Cognive theory 1
Social systems theory 1
Self-determinaon theory 1
SoLoMo theory 1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

PAGE 2676 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022

our assessment and informed choice and may have influenced our findings. However, we
have included the rationale towards relevant contributions and justified the inclusion of
studies related to C-KMS in SMEs.

4. Findings
Based on the results from data analysis, our findings are organized according to the RQs
for which they provide answers.

4.1 State of the art on knowledge management using cloud computing

4.1.1 Current studies on cloud computing used in knowledge management processes in

small- and medium-sized enterprise. In this section, we examine each KM process while
attempting to understand how cloud computing has been used for KM processes. We
classified each article and conference proceeding according to the KM processes listed in
Table 2, along with an article ID number. The complete details of each article are provided
in Appendix.
[Link] Knowledge acquisition. In this review, 40 articles reported knowledge acquisition
using various tools and practices. According to Salter et al. (2015) and [J82], SMEs
should put more effort into acquiring external knowledge. Most studies support the
importance of external knowledge acquisition, as it helps SMEs avoid mistakes [J4].
Knowledge acquisition from big data has also played a vital role in recent times. To justify
this, [J83] utilises big data analytics (BDA) to retrieve knowledge about customers to
transform their business by understanding customer insights. In addition, social media,
an essential platform for capturing external knowledge holds positive implication for KM
in SMEs [J87]. As shown in Table 3, various tools and practices support knowledge
acquisition.
Most cloud-based information systems are explained only as conceptual papers such as
[J19] and [J97], unlike [J61] that shows a C-KMS using mobile applications within a
university. The methodologies used in [J64 and J89] verified that freeware, including social
media, act as a dominant platform for knowledge acquisition.
[Link] Knowledge creation. Overall, 62 articles supported knowledge creation in this
review. Moreover, [J28] emphasises the application of the knowledge creation framework,
where the SECI process and knowledge assets are consolidated to create actionable
knowledge from big data whereas [J127] describes the concept of polychronic knowledge
creation, a dynamic time-space synthesis and its associated sea-like heuristic metaphor,
which is used to create knowledge within cross-cultural business models underpinning
SECI. Several studies [J22, J16, J83] used data mining tools to create knowledge from big
data, thus outlining the role of big data in the knowledge creation process. Some studies
outline conventional practices, such as brainstorming, meetings and inter-firm collaboration
to endorse knowledge creation apart from IT-based systems. Moreover, [J39] and [J87]
confirm that a collaborative environment can generate knowledge for SMEs. Further, a
systematic review analysis by [J46] asserts that cloud computing adoption is beneficial
towards knowledge creation. Table 4 outlines the details of the various tools used for
knowledge creation.
BDA play a vital role towards knowledge creation for SMEs. Most studies support
internet-enabled IS platforms such as expert systems, bug tracking system and blogs
for creating new knowledge. Seven articles [J24, J61, J26, J42, J97, J131, C7]
supported cloud-based systems for knowledge creation, whereas [J24, J42]
emphasised decision-making and [J61] highlighted the enhancement of student’s

VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2677

 Table 2 Classification of KM processes studied
No. KM processes Total Article number

1 Knowledge acquisition 40 J4, J12, J19, J20, J34, J35, J37, J55, J59, J60, J61, J62, J64,
J65, J79, J82, J83, J88, J89, J94, J97, J99, J102, J103, J104,
J107, J110, J111, J113, J116, J122, J124, J128, J129, J130,
J131, C1, C11, C22, C23
2 Knowledge creation 62 J2, J3, J7, J15, J16, J18, J22, J24, J25, J26, J27, J28, J29, J30,
J34, J39, J41, J42, J46, J50, J55, J56, J61, J63, J66, J67, J70,
J71, J73, J76, J81, J83, J87, J92, J94, J95, J96, J99, J100, J101,
J104, J106, J107, J109, J112, J113, J118, J119, J120, J123,
J127, J130, J131, J132, C2, C3, C7, C8, C12, C16, C17, C24
3 Knowledge storage 44 J1, J2, J7, J10, J11, J13, J14, J16, J18, J19, J23, J24, J25, J26,
J30, J35, J42, J44, J45, J50, J53, J58, J61, J63, J67, J70, J79,
J83, J90, J96, J99, J101, J104, J110, J112, J118, J120, J129,
J131, J132, C7, C8, C13, C23
4 Knowledge sharing 108 J2,J4, J5, J6, J8, J9, J10, J11, J16, J17, J18, J21, J23, J24, J25,
J27, J31, J32, J33, J34, J36, J38, J39, J40, J42, J43, J44, J45,
J46, J47, J48, J49, J50, J51, J52, J54, J56, J57, J58, J61, J62,
J67, J68, J69, J70, J72, J74, J75, J77, J78, J79, J80, J81, J82,
J83, J84, J85, J86, J87, J88, J89, J90, J91, J92, J93, J98, J99,
J101, J104, J105, J106, J107, J108, J109, J113, J114, J115,
J116, J117, J118, J120, J121, J123, J124, J125, J126, J128,
J132, J133, C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, C7, C9, C10, C13, C14, C15,
C17, C18, C19, C20, C21, C22, C23, C24
5 Knowledge utilization 32 J7, J14, J27, J35, J44, J45, J46, J53, J60, J61, J63, J64, J70,
J82, J83, J88, J95, J97, J99, J104, J106, J110, J113, J123, J124,
J132, C6, C7, C11, C17, C23, C24

Table 3 Tools/practices used for knowledge acquisition

No Tools/practices for knowledge acquisition Article number

1 KMS J116, C11

2 E-mail, team meetings, WhatsApp groups J4
3 Cloud-based collaboration tools (such as Slack, Asana, Cloud-based J4, J19, J61, J64, J83, J87, J89, J97, J110,
systems, Web 2.0), Data mining tools J111, J113, J124, J129, J130, J131
4 Internet-enabled platforms J20, J34, J37, J64, J89, J79, J122
5 Informal learning, Alliances, Brainstorming, interviews, Recruitment process, J12, J35, J55, J107
Crowdsourcing, Stakeholders
6 Organisational intranets J94

knowledge creation capacity. Three of the identified articles [J26, J97, C7] were
conceptual papers.
[Link] Knowledge storage. Knowledge storage, which is traditionally the most
implemented KM process using IS tools, is discussed in 44 articles. SMEs use different
tools to store knowledge and data. Free to low-cost cloud services such as Google Docs,
Dropbox and OneDrive have a significant impact on knowledge storage [J79 and J29].
However, [J18, J50 and J79] found that SMEs are still comfortable with traditional storage
tools, owing to either a lack of expertise with using the latest technology or lack of
awareness regarding the benefits of using cloud services. Table 5 details various tools used
for knowledge storage.
Most studies demonstrate the usage of cloud-based freeware such as Google Drive,
Dropbox and internet-based platforms such as enterprise resource planning (ERP) and
document management systems for knowledge storage. Recent knowledge storage
technologies such as Hadoop Distributed File System (HDFS) are also discussed in

PAGE 2678 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022

 Table 4 Tools/practices used for knowledge creation
No Tools/practices for knowledge creation Article number

1 Social media J2, J50, J56, J87

2 Through employees, Incubator, large cooperation, VC firms, R&D, Internet J3, J27, J107, C8
search
3 Cloud-based KMS/other cloud applications J24, J26, J39, J42, J61, J97, J131, C7
4 Big Data/Big Data analytics, Data mining tools such as artificial neural J15, J16, J18, J22, J28, J30, J41, J50, J71,
network (ANN), decision tree (DT), support vector machine (SVM), J76, J83, J101, J112, J113, J119, J130, J132
DBpedia, KMS
5 Brainstorming, Benchmarking, Knowledge Filtering, Structured interview, J18, J55, J104, C12, J123, C24
Formal meetings
6 Internet-enabled platforms J7, J18, J25, J34, J50, J67, J81, J95, J100,
J106, J118, J120, C2, C8, C3, C17, C18, J127
7 University–industry collaboration resources, J70
Publications, Internal workbooks
8 Organisational Intranets J94

Table 5 Tools/practices used for knowledge storage

No Tools for knowledge storage Article number

1 Social media J2, J11

2 Excel Sheet J10
3 Google Drive, OneDrive, Dropbox, iCloud, NoSQL, HDFS, other J14, J16, J45, J23, J26, J42, J79, C8, J83, J101,
cloud storage, YAGO, DBpedia J112, J129
4 National archives J13, J30
5 CMS, Distributed Data Base System (DDBS), XML, ERP, DMS, J16, J18, J23, J50, J61, J63, C7, C8, J97, J110
DATA Warehousing, RDBMS
6 Removable drives J23
7 Cloud-based KMS J24, J90
8 Newsletters, Knowledge communities, Web pages, Internet-enabled J7, J25, J67, J70, J104, J118, J120, C7, J95, J132
platforms, KMS, Other methods

conceptual articles. Moreover, some studies have used cloud computing to demonstrate its
direct impact on knowledge storage. For example, [J26] used a knowledge cloud as a
repository, [J42] used a community cloud and [J24] used a C-KMS and discussed
knowledge storage.
[Link] Knowledge sharing. Knowledge sharing is the most studied (n = 108) KM process.
[J38] emphasised that knowledge sharing is the most critical step in KM; however, the most
critical problem faced by organisations is enabling people to share their knowledge. Thus,
the main barrier for knowledge sharing in SMEs is knowledge hiding [J40, J57], as
knowledge exists in tacit form among employees [J27]. This barrier is mainly experienced
due to the lack of the advanced tools [J18, J50]. However, social media platform can
facilitate knowledge sharing in SMEs by allowing collective knowledge to travel seamlessly
through team members [J2]. Other internet-based applications, such as instant messaging,
forums and emails can play a vital role in knowledge sharing among employees. Table 6
illustrates the impact of technology on knowledge sharing.
Cloud-based applications already play a significant role in KM for SMEs. These include
cloud-based knowledge portals [J52], private and public workspace [J45], WeChat
Program [J80], Enterprise Microblog [C18], C-KMS [J24, J47, J61, J78, J90, C7] and
technologies such as Dropbox, Google Docs [J74], SharePoint and Salesforce [J47].
[Link] Knowledge utilisation. There are 32 articles that supported knowledge utilisation,
indicating that it is the least studied KM process. ICT support is necessary to facilitate

VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2679

 Table 6 Tools/practices used for knowledge sharing
No Tools/practices used for knowledge sharing Article ID

1 Social Media J2, J6, J11, J18, J23, J47, J51, J54, J56, J58,
J87, J33, J72, J85
3 Cloud-based application/ KMS J16, J24, J26, J32, J39, J42, J45, J47, J49,
J52, J61, J67, J74, J75, J78, J80, J90, C5, C7,
C18
4 Internet-based applications JJ3, J4, J18, J23, J25, J34, J38, J74, J81, J31,
J33, J36, J8, J9, J67, J68, J79, J93, J106,
J116, J118, J120, J132, C2, C3, C9, C13,
C14, C17, C19
5 Case-based reasoning, CoP, Focus groups, Face-to-face J4, J18, J27, J50, J70, J81, J9, J43, J104,
discussions, R&D teams, Storytelling, Informal networks, Regular J105, J107, J121, J123, C1, C14, C24
meetings, monthly discussions, Video sharing, Consulting with
employees
6 In-house training/Brainstorming J82

knowledge utilisation for the organisation [J88]. While there are no known IT systems that
can possibly automate knowledge utilisation and replace humans, technologies can
develop environment for effective knowledge utilisation. In general, technology can support
knowledge application by embedding knowledge into organisational routines (Alavi and
Leidner, 2001). Moreover, KMS is a useful tool for managing knowledge in an organisation
as it can generate knowledge objects that can be applied at work, thereby supporting
knowledge utilisation (Chung and Galletta, 2012). Effective utilisation of knowledge in an
organisation can lead to performance improvement [J70, J88], better decision-making [J96,
J44], improvement of competitive advantage[J82] and innovation [J99].
[J44] concluded cloud services enable efficient management of knowledge through timely
and flexible routing of documents in the organisation, as most knowledge exists in the form
of digital documents [J61], i.e. knowledge artefacts (Davenport and Prusak, 1998). Various
sources such as big data and social media indirectly facilitate knowledge utilisation in
SMEs. Thus, knowledge from and about customers can be extracted from various big data
sources using analytics [J83]. These knowledge are then used by an organisation to
improve their products and optimally respond to customers (Jin et al., 2016).
4.1.2 Contribution of knowledge management processes in small- and medium-sized
enterprise. In this section we discuss contributions outlined by studies related to KM
processes in SMEs by analysing the findings and research/practical implications of the
selected articles. Common contribution items include improvement of competitive
advantage, performance, innovation and decision-making. This review has intentionally
excluded performance improvement, as several studies have empirically confirmed that IT-
based KM can improve the performance of an organisation especially for SMEs (Rasula
et al., 2012).
Three articles [J7, J75 and C3] have included intellectual capital enhancement as part of
their study contributions, where [J7] offered an information-driven knowledge management
framework, [J75] emphasised that robotised SMEs will lower the influence of human capital
and [C3] empirically analysed the relationship between intellectual capital and knowledge
integration in an open ecosystem. Other articles supporting competitive advantage,
innovation and decision-making capacity are presented in Table 7 and Figure 8.
[Link] Contributions related to knowledge acquisition. According to Salter et al. (2015),
knowledge acquisition is one of the most important predictors of competitive advantage.
This review supports the findings of Salter et al. (2015), as competitive advantage is
the most significant and reported contribution of knowledge acquisition. This highlights the
importance of SMEs in actively pursuing knowledge and expertise. Moreover, social media

PAGE 2680 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022

 Table 7 Studies that report specific contributions based on KM processes
No KM process Competitive advantage Innovation Decision-making

1 Knowledge acquisition J4, J12, J64, J79, J82, J83, J4, J20, J62, J64, J82, J89, J20, J35, J37, J55, J79,
J89, J128, J130, J131, C7 J124, J123, J99, C23 J130, C7
2 Knowledge creation J16, J70, J83, J100, J130, J3, J27, J39, J44, J67, J96, J3, J16, J22, J24, J25, J26,
J123, J130, J131, C7, C8 J97, J101, J109, J120, J41, J42, J56, J67, J95,
J127, J132, C12 J96, J104, J106, J130,
J131, J132, C7, C8, C24
3 Knowledge storage J11, J16, J70, J83, C7, C8 J13, J16, J26, J44, J70, J11, J16, J25, J35, J42,
J105, J120, J67, J96, J132, J67, J96, J104, J132, C7,
C23 C8, C13
4 Knowledge sharing J4, J6, J9, J16, J54, J79, J3, J4, J5, J8, J16, J27, J3, J5, J8, J9, J11, J16,
J82, J83, J85, J89, J123, J39, J40, J43, J47, J44, J17, J24, J25, J42, J48,
J126, C7 J48, J52, J54, J57, J56, J56, J57, J67, J68, J69,
J62, J67, J68, J70, J74, J79, J83, J86, J104, J106,
J77, J82, J85, J89, J99, J121, C7, C13, C15, C18,
J101, J108, J109, J115, C24
J117, J120, J124, J125,
J128, J132, C21, C23
5 Knowledge utilisation J82, J83, J123, C7 J27, J44, J64, J82, J99, J83, J95, J96, J104, J106,
J101, J124, J132, C6, C11, J132, C7, C24
C23

Figure 8 Distribution of studies that report specific contributions

40 38

35

30 27

25
20
20

15 13 13
11 10 10 11 12 11
10 7 8
6
4
5

0
Knowledge Knowledge Knowledge Knowledge Knowledge
acquisition creation storage sharing utilisation
Compeve Advantage Innovaon Decision making

plays a significant role in acquiring external knowledge and competitive information, as it

provides easy accessibility to customers’ and competitors’ information [J89]. Another
notable contribution is from big data driven KMS [C7], which leverages knowledge assets to
improve the competitive advantage, and decision-making of a firm. KMS also contributes to
organisation’s absorptive capacity, innovation process [C11] and decision-making process
[J25]. A majority of the recently established internet-enabled platforms enables acquisition
of knowledge, development of innovative ideas [J20] and better decisions-making [J79].
Conventional practices, such as brainstorming helps in better decision-making, which is
supported by [J55].
[Link] Contributions related to knowledge creation and storage. In knowledge creation and
storage, decision-making capacity is the most reported contribution. Prior literature
demonstrates a strong relationship between knowledge creation, storage and decision-

VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2681

 making. Furthermore, [J96] demonstrates that decision-makers often encounter unexpected
events and challenges that could potentially jeopardise the organisation’s sustainability.
However, successful responses to such events provide benefits to the organisation.
Organisations possessing a collection of knowledge generated in different domains, which
is stored in a company’s repository for easy access, will enable them to manage risk
situations.
Studies [J16 and J83] demonstrate that new knowledge is created through big data which
support competitive advantage and good decision-making [J22]. It is also proven that
knowledge created through social media enhances competitive advantages and decision-
making [J11]. Related to innovation through knowledge creation, [J27] reveals that the
owner’s innovativeness acts as a major enabler of the knowledge creation process,
whereas [J70] highlights university–industry collaborations for knowledge creation.
[Link] Contributions related to knowledge sharing and utilisation. Innovation is the most
reported contribution of the knowledge sharing and utilisation process. Prior research has
recognized the link between knowledge sharing and innovation, as well as knowledge
utilisation and innovation. For instance, Singh et al. (2019) posit that knowledge sharing
drives innovation, whereas Roper et al. (2008) demonstrate that firms’ knowledge utilisation
capacity boosts innovation outcomes. Several studies have emphasised different tools such
as social media [J54, J56, J89], knowledge portal [J52], online environment [J85] and
SharePoint [J47] support innovation through knowledge sharing in an organisation. Among
these studies [J54, J85 and J89] also supported competitive advantage.
Online applications such as social media [J56, J83], chat tools [C15] and enterprise
microblogs [C18] play an important role in decision-making through knowledge sharing.
However, the findings of [J86] reveal that sharing knowledge does not sufficiently enhance
the quality of a firm’s decisions; in fact, data analytics competency plays a critical role in this
regard. Thus, big data utilisation, data quality, tool sophistication and employee analytics
capability play equally important roles in enhancing decision-making quality by sharing the
knowledge obtained from using analytical tools in an organisation.
Regarding the contribution related to knowledge utilisation, [C11] confirms that KMS utilises
relevant knowledge and catalyses innovation. [J99] supports innovation as one of the
dimensions of knowledge utilisation. Chung and Galletta (2012) highlight the fact that
knowledge is mostly used for innovation, that is, create radically different solutions. These
studies show the dominance of innovation through knowledge utilisation, thus supporting
our analysis. [J27] reveals that the bulk of organisational knowledge in SMEs is often held
by the knowledge owner responsible for driving innovation. To create new solutions for
clients, SMEs reuse its prior knowledge and expertise. Some studies supported various IS,
such as KMS [C7] and wiki/blogs [J64], as they improve collaboration and knowledge
reuse.
To summarise, we determined that knowledge sharing is the most studied KM process (n =
108), whereas knowledge utilisation is the least studied (n = 32) among the selected
studies. We also ascertained that approximately half of the studies (n = 80; 51%) focused
exclusively on a single KM process. Similarly, a significant number of studies (n = 37; 23%)
focused on two KM processes. However, all KM processes must be effectively
implemented for holistic improvement of the organization’s business performance. In other
words, the entire KM ecosystem can only be effective when all KM processes are effectively
implemented. However, few studies (n = 4; 3%) have encompassed all five KM processes.
Of the two articles (n = 2; 1%) claiming to have fully utilised cloud services for KM, one
discusses C-KMS as a solution for managing knowledge [J61], while the other [J83] is a
conceptual article describing the potential of cloud services in supporting big data. This
finding confirms that, although numerous empirical analyses on KM processes and tools in
SMEs exist, only a few studies demonstrate how the whole gamut of KM processes can

PAGE 2682 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022

adopt cloud computing in SMEs. This analysis directly implies that there is lack of studies
demonstrating effective KM in SMEs.
The major inferences that can be drawn from studies based on contributions are
summarised below:
䊏 Studies reporting the contribution of “competitive advantage” for knowledge creation
and utilisation processes are significantly low compared to other contributions such as
“innovation” and “decision making”.
䊏 Effective decision-making is key to the success of SMEs; a lack of studies in this
direction has impeded the potential of KM and the growth of SMEs.
䊏 Devising effective metrics for KM utilisation enables evaluation of the effectiveness of
KM processes. However, lack of technological awareness of knowledge utilisation
adversely affects the application of KM in SMEs.

4.2 Knowledge management using cloud computing by small- and medium-sized

enterprise
While the RQ1 addresses the “what” question regarding the role of cloud computing in KM
for SMEs, we found that RQ2 needs to be adequately answered to understand the following
“how” question of our review: How can SMEs effectively manage knowledge using cloud
computing? To extend our in-depth understanding of this matter, we further analysed the
articles (n = 157) and grouped them according to the four categories of SMEs as per
Cerchione and Esposito (2017) as Latecomer, Explorer, Exploiter and Guidepost.
We could map the SMEs mentioned in the 157 articles into one of the two categories:
Explorer and Latecomer. Studies such as [J4, J12 and J55] belong to the latecomer
category, as these SMEs are inclined to use simple technology tools and ad-hoc traditional
practices such as email [J4], R&D teams and stakeholder engagement initiatives [J3, J107].
The SMEs in this category have not coded organisational knowledge; thus a majority of the
knowledge exists in tacit form where individuals are the prime source of knowledge
(Nonaka, 1994). Thus, latecomer SMEs face knowledge scarcity, which impede KM. In
contrast, studies in the explorer category include SMEs utilising Internet-based platforms
such as knowledge portal [C17] and social media[J89] to manage knowledge. Such
platforms support business growth through gaining knowledge about the market and
business processes [J20]. Some studies supported freeware cloud services to document
exchanges [J44] and knowledge discovery [J24]. However, C-KMS usage has only been
identified in a few studies [J78, J47, C7]. Thus, explorer SMEs only consider IS as a
platform for knowledge discovery or knowledge sharing.
In both latecomer and explorer SMEs, codification by the knowledge creation process are
virtually non-existent even though they are the most frequently associated activities in KM
(Torraco, 2000). For instance, among latecomer SMEs, knowledge creation is primarily the
responsibility of the owner and the employee’s role is limited [J27]. In explorer SMEs,
knowledge creation involves collaboration among individuals through internet-based
platforms [J11, J20, C17]. While some studies (J14, J83) supported big data as a source of
latest knowledge, they sparsely discussed the knowledge creation process and excluded
codification of the knowledge. This implies that knowledge is not properly coded and stored
on a common platform in these SMEs. Consequently, knowledge creation and storage are
still at a nascent stage, especially in terms of their relationship with IS [J46]. Thus, due to the
failure of an appropriate knowledge creation process, SMEs are unable to effectively
manage their knowledge.
We identified that most SMEs aim to become guidepost SMEs. To be part of this category,
SMEs should invest heavily in improving their KM processes by adopting innovative KM
tools and practices. However, the lack of utilisation of C-KMS for KM due to a shortage of IT

VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2683

 skills and cloud awareness prohibits SMEs from reaching the guidepost category. Similarly,
external knowledge acquisition is in high demand, because plethora of knowledge exists
beyond the boundaries of SMEs (Lee and Kim, 2019). Moreover, few studies have
supported the process of external knowledge acquisition through KMS except [J13] which
promotes the role of KMS in supporting big data to create knowledge in SMEs. Thus, C-
KMS can serve as an appropriate solution, as it provides an economical platform to make
knowledge available on-demand, like other computing resources such as memory and
bandwidth. Furthermore, integrating cloud computing with KMS provides an environment
for knowledge as a service, like the concept of software-as-a-service. This helps knowledge
artefacts, the explicit form of knowledge (Davenport and Prusak, 1998), move smoothly
without impeding boundaries (Assante et al., 2016). When KM becomes a cloud service,
more knowledge can be gathered from multiple sources, thus supporting the process
whereby data is presented and aggregated as valuable knowledge. This could reduce the
scarcity of knowledge in SMEs.
C-KMS supports big data (Depeige and Doyencourt, 2015) containing a variety of
structured, unstructured and complex data [J83]. C-KMS can extract knowledge from
structured and unstructured sources. This not only enables external knowledge exploration
in a structured format (Caione et al., 2015), but also improves knowledge acquisition
(Dezi et al., 2018). The acquired knowledge can be codified and stored as knowledge
artefacts in cloud services, which can be shared and used within an organisation. The
theory of knowledge management, the second-most noted theory in our analysis, posits
that codification is one of the major activities in KM (Torraco, 2000); thus the failure to
codify knowledge limits SMEs’ assessment. The codification approach is mainly used to
document knowledge and then collect it in a searchable electronic KM system that
allows easy access without requiring to contact the provider of the knowledge (Obeidat
et al., 2016). Employees can also codify tacit knowledge to knowledge artefacts that
can be later moved to C-KMS as suggested by (Dalkir, 2013; Paraponaris et al., 2015).
When both tacit and explicit knowledge are codified in a structured and formalised way
in the organisation, complete organisational knowledge will be available in an explicit
format (Dalkir, 2013), which is a readily usable format for SMEs.
C-KMS can support how knowledge is presented and aggregated in the organisation. If C-
KMS is adopted, the knowledge loss will be minimised in the organisation and knowledge
integration/creation will be maximised through knowledge creation strategy of codification.
As knowledge creation mitigates knowledge loss (Levallet and Chan, 2019), we can
therefore assert that C-KMS can minimise knowledge loss and maximise knowledge
integration, thereby improving knowledge heterogeneity in the organisation. Prior studies
(Balina et al., 2017) have already supported that C-KMS supports collaboration between
and within organisations, thus leading to effective sharing of the knowledge, skills and
experiences of SMEs (Li et al. (2019). Moreover, C-KMS offers easy access to knowledge
artefacts(Gupta et al., 2013), which allows sharing and application of knowledge for various
requirements. Based on these arguments, we deduced that C-KMS can systematically
support KM in an efficient manner.

4.3 Benefits of cloud knowledge management systems to small- and medium-sized

enterprises
The SLR findings are useful for acknowledging the importance of cloud computing in KM to
ensure that we can discuss how various studies use cloud computing in KM processes.
Although the findings from the SLR data analysis yielded conclusive answers to RQ1 and
RQ2, it could not completely address RQ3. Therefore, to answer RQ3: What are the benefits
of Cloud-based-KMS services to SMEs?, we analysed the benefits of C-KMS services in
terms of availability, reliability, cost, scalability and security of cloud computing based on
studies by Gupta et al.( 2013); Wang et al. (2014); Balina et al.(2017). While analysing the

PAGE 2684 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022

benefits, we considered the following five major aspects of cloud computing that can
support KM in SMEs.
The first aspect is the availability of knowledge artefacts. Cloud services improve availability
by offering easy access to knowledge artefacts through any device (Gupta et al., 2013)
from anywhere and at any-time (Khayer et al., 2020; Mohammadian et al., 2020). This is
mainly due to knowledge creation from both internal and external knowledge in C-KMS,
which reduces tacitness and knowledge loss, while increasing knowledge utilisation in
SMEs.
The second aspect is reliability, which is typically expressed as fault-free operation of a
system determined by accuracy, fault tolerance and recovery. As part of reliability
assurance, risk identification techniques can be performed, which anticipate failure
occurrences (Tian et al., 2020) and make C-KMS more reliable than traditional KMS.
Moreover, cloud services match the knowledge artefacts with users expectations (Tella
et al., 2020) by maximising effectiveness.
The third aspect is scalability. While we maximise knowledge creation and storage process,
the cloud infrastructure will seamlessly support it. Thus, C-KMS’s scalable online
environment can manage numerous knowledge artefacts without affecting system
performance, while making it affordable for SMEs (Aksoy and Algawiaz, 2014).
The fourth dimension is cost. The cloud delivers services on a pay-per-use basis (Khayer
et al., 2020) to meet the demands of SMEs routine activities and reduce their operations and
maintenance costs (Gupta et al., 2013). As the cloud supports big data, it lowers the entry
cost of C-KMS to use computer-intensive resources [J45], thereby providing a means for
gathering and redistributing knowledge (Aksoy and Algawiaz, 2014) and reducing the cost
of knowledge acquisition, thus making business applications more affordable to SMEs (Wee
and Chua, 2013).
The fifth dimension is information security, which emphasises the protection of data
from external users through proper credentials (Aksoy and Algawiaz, 2014). C-KMS
promotes efficient knowledge sharing between and within organisations (Balina et al.,
2017). A study by [J45] argues that cloud provides public and private workspaces for
accessing knowledge, wherein the private workspace is assigned to employees or
authorised persons for the management of organisational knowledge and the public
workspace is for external stakeholders and inter-firm collaboration for collective
knowledge.
Using the proposed evaluation factors, we can assess the value of C-KMS for SMEs and
measure the benefits of moving KM into the cloud to manage knowledge effectively for
SMEs. These findings support our understanding that C-KMS can offer an efficient and
useful way to implement KM processes for SMEs.

5. Discussion
In this study, we systematically reviewed 157 research articles from journals and
conference proceedings on “knowledge management” and “cloud computing” to
investigate relevant KM processes used in SMEs. This paper provides a logical review of
the research area substantiating the studies in the KM field and guide future research in this
direction. However, only a few studies have supported and consolidated the five KM
processes and C-KMS. Moreover, existing studies on this nexus of areas are largely
conceptual. Therefore, there is a lack of intervention-based studies related to KM and cloud
computing for SMEs, i.e. a dearth of design science research and action research that
demonstrate the real-world impact of cloud computing on KM processes for SMEs.
In terms of knowledge creation and acquisition, most studies supported cloud-based
freeware applications without describing how they enhance the knowledge acquisition

VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2685

 capacity of SMEs. The codification of knowledge artefacts aids in identifying the knowledge
to be shared and improves the efficacy of knowledge transfer (Gou et al., 2019). However,
limited studies demonstrate codification of knowledge using cloud services that directly
support the knowledge creation process, implying that there are gaps in the execution of
the knowledge-creation process using cloud computing. Moreover, we determined that the
knowledge acquisition process mostly contributed towards competitive advantage (n = 11),
supporting prior studies that competitive advantage relies on acquisition of knowledge
within the firm and from the external environment. Similarly, knowledge creation contributed
the most to decision-making capacity (n = 20) since newly created knowledge provides
people with the ability to enhance decision-making (Abubakar et al., 2019).
Our review found that studies supporting knowledge storage demonstrated a superior
decision-making capacity (n = 12). Most studies were conducted on traditional IS tools,
whereas new database paradigms, such as NoSQL and HDFS, were seldom highlighted at
a conceptual level. Thus, the real organisational impact of cloud on knowledge storage for
SMEs is under-researched.
Knowledge sharing is the most widely studied KM process, focusing on Internet-based
platforms. Although there is a dominance of social media applications in knowledge
sharing, future studies should outline how it can be used for all five KM processes using
cloud computing. Finally, studies on knowledge utilisation are very scant. This is a natural
area for future KM research to explore the benefits of cloud computing for SMEs. This
finding is in sync with the studies by Obeidat et al. (2016) demonstrating a positive
knowledge-sharing culture (n = 38) and effective knowledge utilisation (n = 11) can help
firms improve their innovation capability.
Cloud computing is emerging as a useful tool to assist an organisation’s overall KM efforts
(Sultan, 2013) by facilitating the real-time requirements while implementing KMSs (Uden
and He, 2017). While this review found that most studies focus on cloud-based freeware
applications for KM, it determined that studies are lacking on the use of all KM processes in
SMEs using cloud computing. To address these shortcomings, we have emphasised the
adoption of a holistic C-KMS solution for SMEs. If KM processes are supported by cloud
services, more knowledge can be gathered and aggregated within the SMEs. Therefore, C-
KMS can support the entire gamut of KM processes in an efficient manner.

6. Implications and future directions

6.1 Theoretical implications
This study on the research areas of KM and cloud computing in SMEs is analysed using
three essential aspects of “what, why and how” questions by following the
recommendations of Wang and Wang (2020).
6.1.1 What is the role of knowledge management in small- and medium-sized enterprises?
This study helps understand the role of KM in SMEs by emphasising that cloud is a
prominent technology to effectively manage knowledge. This review analysis evaluated all
KM processes in SMEs and found that only few studies covered all KM processes in a
single study. Most studies highlight the importance of knowledge sharing for SMEs and
various empirical analyses focus on SMEs’ knowledge-sharing strategies. Key studies
emphasise that tacitness and knowledge constraints hinder effective KM, implying that
SMEs lack sufficient knowledge for their routine activities and do not follow systematic KM
principles.
KM promotes high innovative performance [J82] as innovation is nurtured by the application
of knowledge (Cabeza-Pullés et al., 2020). Apart from knowledge and experience, an
effective IT infrastructure enables the exploration of new knowledge and exploitation
of existing/new knowledge for innovation in the firm [J56]. In addition, the simultaneous

PAGE 2686 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022

execution of knowledge exploration and exploitation facilitates SMEs to become knowledge
ambidextrous (Benitez et al., 2018). Cloud computing can be treated as a disruptive
technology, and the deployment of cloud technology can attain a higher level of
organisational agility [J121], thereby providing a virtual space for SMEs to share and gather
knowledge (Scuotto et al., 2019). Through C-KMS, SMEs can explore knowledge from
external knowledge sources, such as big data using analytics, as well as exploit knowledge
artefacts to boost innovative activities.
The consequence of the lockdowns and shutdowns of businesses in addition to the
government-mandated social restrictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic have impacted
SMEs more acutely than larger firms (Papadopoulos et al., 2020). SMEs rely on key
resources to work from their homes for business continuity. This has resulted in decreased
interpersonal knowledge transfer and increased reliance on technology for KM (Soto-
Acosta, 2020). In this scenario, C-KMS can enable SMEs to collect, share and store
knowledge remotely, thereby supporting the regional and marginalised communities served
by the SME sector.
6.1.2 Why are small- and medium-sized enterprises chosen to evaluate the need for a
cloud-based knowledge management solution? We selected the SME sector for this review
because, in general, it is a vulnerable sector in any country’s economy. Most SME-based
studies have exploited the use of cloud-based freeware or outdated IS tools and techniques
to manage knowledge. The impact of the benefits of C-KMS, as a genuinely feasible
alternative for effective KM, has not been analysed for SMEs. This impedes SMEs from
reaching the guidepost category towards KM, because effective KM is a major requirement
for any organization to be adaptive and innovative.
6.1.3 How can the effectiveness of knowledge management processes be improved in
small- and medium-sized enterprises? This review emphasises the importance of C-KMS
for the enhancement of KM in SMEs by investigating its benefits in terms of availability,
reliability, cost, scalability and security. C-KMS supports knowledge exploration for
facilitating KM processes (Gonzalez, 2019) and enhances resource availability, both of
which are typically not endorsed by traditional KMS. However, current studies largely ignore
the importance of cloud technology in their KM studies related to SMEs.

6.2 Practical implications

The findings of this study also have important practical implications. First, adopting C-KMS
provides a strong foundation for managing knowledge artefacts for SMEs in a cost-effective
and secure way. Thus, SMEs can have better control over the quantity and quality of
knowledge flowing within organisations, while reaping the benefits of cloud services. C-
KMS improves the efficiency of KM by increasing availability of knowledge artefacts, which
in turn aids SMEs’ growth. SMEs generally depend on external stakeholders for external
knowledge. C-KMS can enhance external knowledge exploration, which will create a
competitive advantage for SMEs, thus levelling the playing field with large corporations in a
competitive market. Likewise, C-KMS supports codification of organisational knowledge,
which aids employees in swiftly identifying knowledge according to their requirements, while
providing separate platforms for knowledge sharing for employees and stakeholders. This
implies that to succeed, SMEs should not ignore the opportunity that cloud technologies
provide to manage knowledge. Finally, C-KMS paves the way for future KM opportunities by
exploring the benefits of cloud computing for sharing artefacts across organisations.

6.3 Future research direction

It is worth noting that in the case of successful SMEs that have managed their knowledge
efficiently [J27], most of their knowledge resides outside the boundary of the organization
and they are contingent on tacit knowledge. However, the entire breadth of KM processes

VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2687

 has not been implemented using cloud computing in SMEs. Cloud computing has only
been implemented with support in one or two KM processes in SMEs. Thus, the current
literature largely lacks a holistic approach towards the role of cloud computing in SMEs for
KM. In this context, we suggest that future research can facilitate the understanding of how
cloud services can effectively utilize all five KM processes, e.g. by looking through the lens
of knowledge ambidexterity. Literature has already proven that ambidextrous organization
offers superior performance, and the efficiency of KM will increase with the simultaneous
approach of knowledge exploration and knowledge exploitation (Benitez et al., 2018).

7. Conclusion
The focus of this SLR study is to explore the role of cloud computing in KM for SMEs. The
initial motivation of this study was the findings related to SMEs where KM processes are in
its nascent stage with limited IS intervention. As the whole gamut of KM processes are not
effectively studied in the KM literature for SMEs, a comprehensive study is required on the
usage of C-KMS in SMEs by examining its impact on the five KM processes. This study
thoroughly analysed 157 articles on the role of cloud computing for KM in SMEs. Our
findings reveal that SMEs are ineffective at KM because they rarely use more than one KM
process and the adoption of C-KMS services is limited. Finally, this study suggests that C-
KMS can be offered as a potentially effective solution for KM in SMEs.

References
Abubakar, A.M., Elrehail, H., Alatailat, M.A. and ElçI, A. (2019), “Knowledge management, decision-making
style and organizational performance”, Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 104-114.
Aksoy, M.S. and Algawiaz, D. (2014), “Knowledge management in the cloud: benefits and risks”,
International Journal of Computer Applications Technology and Research, Vol. 3 No. 11, pp. 718-720.
Alavi, M. and Leidner, D.E. (2001), “Knowledge management and knowledge management systems:
conceptual foundations and research issues”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 107-136.
Al-Emran, M., Mezhuyev, V., Kamaludin, A. and Shaalan, K. (2018), “The impact of knowledge
management processes on information systems: a systematic review”, International Journal of
Information Management, Vol. 43, pp. 173-187, available at: [Link]/science/article/pii/
S0268401217308186

Al-Jabri, H. and Al-Busaidi, K.A. (2018), “Inter-organizational knowledge transfer in Omani SMEs: influencing
factors”, VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, Vol. 48 No. 3, pp. 333-351.
Arias-Pérez, J., Coronado-Medina, A. and Perdomo-Charry, G. (2021), “Big data analytics capability as a
mediator in the impact of open innovation on firm performance”, Journal of Strategy and Management,
Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print.

Arpaci, I. (2017), “Antecedents and consequences of cloud computing adoption in education to achieve
knowledge management”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 70, pp. 382-390, available at: www.
[Link]/science/article/pii/S0747563217300249
Assante, D., Castro, M., Hamburg, I. and Martin, S. (2016), “The use of cloud computing in SMEs”,
Procedia Computer Science, Vol. 83, pp. 1207-1212, available at: [Link]/science/
article/pii/S1877050916302836
Audretsch, D.B. and Belitski, M. (2021), “Knowledge complexity and firm performance: evidence from
the European SMEs”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 25 No. 4.
Balina, S., Baumgarte, D. and Salna, E. (2017), “Cloud based cross-system integration for small and
medium-sized enterprises”, Procedia Computer Science, Vol. 104, pp. 127-132, available at: www.
[Link]/science/article/pii/S1877050917300856
Banerjee, P., Friedrich, R., Bash, C., Goldsack, P., Huberman, B., Manley, J., Patel, C., Ranganathan, P.
and Veitch, A. (2011), “Everything as a service: powering the new information economy”, Computer,
Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 36-43.

PAGE 2688 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022

Benitez, J., Castillo, A., Llorens, J. and Braojos, J. (2018), “IT-enabled knowledge ambidexterity and
innovation performance in small US firms: the moderator role of social media capability”, Information &
Management, Vol. 55 No. 1, pp. 131-143.
Bouzary, H. and Chen, F.F. (2020), “A classification-based approach for integrated service matching and
composition in cloud manufacturing”, Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, Vol. 66,
p. 101989, available at: [Link]/science/article/pii/S0736584520302003
 ndez-Pérez, V. and Rolda
Cabeza-Pullés, D., Ferna  n-Bravo, M.I. (2020), “Internal networking and
innovation ambidexterity: the mediating role of knowledge management processes in university
research”, European Management Journal, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 450-461.
Caione, A., Paiano, R., Guido, A.L., Fait, M. and Scorrano, P. (2015), “Knowledge gathering from social
media to improve marketing in Agri-food sector”, Communications of the IBIMA, Vol. 2015, pp. 1-13,
available at: [Link]/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/[Link]
Calvo-Mora, A., Navarro-Garcı́a, A., Rey-Moreno, M. and Perianez-Cristobal, R. (2016), “Excellence
management practices, knowledge management and key business results in large organisations and
SMEs: a multi-group analysis”, European Management Journal, Vol. 34 No. 6, pp. 661-673.
Centobelli, P., Cerchione, R. and Esposito, E. (2019), “Measuring the use of knowledge management
systems in supply firms”, Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 426-441.
Cerchione, R. and Esposito, E. (2017), “Using knowledge management systems: a taxonomy of SME
strategies”, International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 1551-1562.
Cerchione, R., Centobelli, P., Zerbino, P. and Anand, A. (2020), “Back to the future of knowledge
management systems off the beaten paths”, Management Decision, Vol. 58 No. 9.
Chowdhury, S.R. (2011), “Impact of global crisis on small and medium enterprises”, Global Business
Review, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 377-399.
Choy, K.L.T., Siu, K.Y.P., Ho, T.S.G., Wu, C.H., Lam, H.Y., Tang, V. and Tsang, Y.P. (2018), “An intelligent
case-based knowledge management system for quality improvement in nursing homes”, VINE Journal of
Information and Knowledge Management Systems, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 103-121.
Chung, T. and Galletta, D. (2012), “Conceptualizing knowledge use: a theoretical framework and
empirical study”, 2012 45th HI International Conference on System Sciences, IEEE, Maui, HI,
pp. 3949-3958.
Dalkir, K. (2013), Knowledge Management in Theory and Practice, Routledge.
Davenport, T.H. and Prusak, L. (1998), Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They
Know, Harvard Business Press.
Depeige, A. and Doyencourt, D. (2015), “Actionable knowledge as a service (AKAAS): leveraging big
data analytics in cloud computing environments”, Journal of Big Data, Vol. 2 No. 1, p. 12.
Dezi, L., Santoro, G., Gabteni, H. and Pellicelli, A.C. (2018), “The role of big data in shaping
ambidextrous business process management”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 24
No. 5, pp. 1163-1175.
Gast, J., Gundolf, K., Harms, R. and Matos Collado, E. (2019), “Knowledge management and coopetition:
how do cooperating competitors balance the needs to share and protect their knowledge?”, Industrial
Marketing Management, Vol. 77, pp. 65-74, available at: [Link]/science/article/pii/
S0019850118303298

Gonzalez, R.V.D. (2019), “Knowledge exploration and exploitation in team context”, Total Quality
Management & Business Excellence, Vol. 30 Nos 15/16, pp. 1654-1674.
Gou, J., Li, N., Lyu, T., Lyu, X. and Zhang, Z. (2019), “Barriers of knowledge transfer and mitigating
strategies in collaborative management system implementations”, VINE Journal of Information and
Knowledge Management Systems, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 2-20.
Gupta, P., Seetharaman, A. and Raj, J.R. (2013), “The usage and adoption of cloud computing by small
and medium businesses”, International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 33 No. 5, pp. 861-874.
Huber, G.P. (1991), “Organizational learning: the contributing processes and the literatures”,
Organization Science, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 88-115.
Jin, J., Liu, Y., Ji, P. and Liu, H. (2016), “Understanding big consumer opinion data for market-driven
product design”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 54 No. 10, pp. 3019-3041.

VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2689

 nior, E.M., Gobbo, J.A., Fukunaga, F., Cerchione, R. and Centobelli, P. (2020), “Use of knowledge
Ju
management systems: analysis of the strategies of Brazilian small and medium enterprises”, Journal of
Knowledge Management, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 369-394.
Khayer, A., Talukder, M.S., Bao, Y. and Hossain, M.N. (2020), “Cloud computing adoption and its impact on
SMEs’ performance for cloud supported operations: a dual-stage analytical approach”, Technology in
Society, Vol. 60, p. 101225, available at: [Link]/science/article/pii/S0160791X19301599

Kitchenham, B. and Brereton, P. (2013), “A systematic review of systematic review process research in
software engineering”, Information and Software Technology, Vol. 55 No. 12, pp. 2049-2075.

Kourtesis, D., Alvarez-Rodrı́guez, J.M. and Paraskakis, I. (2014), “Semantic-based QoS management in cloud
systems: current status and future challenges”, Future Generation Computer Systems, Vol. 32, pp. 307-323,
available at: [Link]/science/article/pii/S0167739X1300232X

Kucharska, W. (2021), “Do mistakes acceptance foster innovation? Polish and US cross-country study of
tacit knowledge sharing in IT”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 25 No. 11.

Le Dinh, T., Rinfret, L., Raymond, L. and Dong Thi, B.T. (2013), “Towards the reconciliation of knowledge
management and e-collaboration systems”, Interactive Technology and Smart Education, Vol. 10 No. 2,
pp. 95-115.
Lee, J. and Kim, N. (2019), “Know yourself and find your partners”, Management Research Review,
Vol. 42 No. 12, pp. 1333-1352.
Levallet, N. and Chan, Y.E. (2019), “Organizational knowledge retention and knowledge loss”, Journal of
Knowledge Management, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 176-199.

Li, Z., Wang, N. and Ge, S. (2021), “Exploitative or explorative innovation? An event study of cloud
computing business value”, Electronic Commerce Research, pp. 1-24.

Li, Z., Liu, X., Wang, W., Vatankhah Barenji, A. and Huang, G.Q. (2019), “CKshare: secured cloud-based
knowledge-sharing blockchain for injection mold redesign”, Enterprise Information Systems, Vol. 13
No. 1, pp. 1-33.
Lin, H.-F. (2014), “Contextual factors affecting knowledge management diffusion in SMEs”, Industrial
Management & Data Systems, Vol. 114 No. 9, pp. 1415-1437.
Maravilhas, S. and Martins, J. (2019), “Strategic knowledge management in a digital environment: tacit
and explicit knowledge in fab labs”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 94, pp. 353-359, available at:
[Link]/science/article/pii/S0148296318300675
Mohammadian, V., Navimipour, N.J., Hosseinzadeh, M. and Darwesh, A. (2020), “Comprehensive and
systematic study on the fault tolerance architectures in cloud computing”, Journal of Circuits, Systems
and Computers, Vol. 29 No. 15, p. 2050240.
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D.G., Altman, D., Antes, G., Atkins, D., Barbour, V.,
Barrowman, N. and Berlin, J.A. (2009), “Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-
analyses: the PRISMA statement”, Journal of Chinese Integrative Medicine, Vol. 7 No. 9, pp. 889-896.
Nonaka, I. (1994), “A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation”, Organization Science, Vol. 5
No. 1, pp. 14-37.
O’Leary, D.E. (2016), “Is knowledge management dead (or dying)?”, Journal of Decision Systems, Vol. 25
No. sup1, pp. 512-526.
Obeidat, B.Y., Al-Suradi, M.M. and Tarhini, A. (2016), “The impact of knowledge management on
innovation: an empirical study on Jordanian consultancy firms”, Management Research Review, Vol. 39
No. 10, pp. 1214-1238.
Papadopoulos, T., Baltas, K.N. and Balta, M.E. (2020), “The use of digital technologies by small and
medium enterprises during COVID-19: implications for theory and practice”, International Journal of
Information Management, Vol. 55, p. 102192, available at: [Link]/science/article/pii/
S0268401220310549
Paraponaris, C., Sigal, M., Echajari, L. and Thomas, C. (2015), “Learning from complex and
heterogeneous experiences: the role of knowledge codification”, Journal of Knowledge Management,
Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 968-986.

Pauleen, D.J. and Wang, W.Y.C. (2017), “Does big data mean big knowledge? KM perspectives on big
data and analytics”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 1-6.

PAGE 2690 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022

Polyakov, M., Khanin, I., Bilozubenko, V., Korneyev, M. and Nebaba, N. (2020), “Information technologies
for developing a company’s knowledge management system”, Knowledge and Performance
Management, Vol. 4 No. 1.
Rashid, A.S., Tout, K. and Yakan, A. (2021), “The critical human behavior factors and their impact on
knowledge management system–cycles”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 27 No. 6.

Rasula, J., Vuksic, V.B. and Stemberger, M.I. (2012), “The impact of knowledge management on
organisational performance”, Economic and Business Review for Central and South-Eastern Europe,
Vol. 14 No. 2, p. 147.

Roper, S., Du, J. and Love, J.H. (2008), “Modelling the innovation value chain”, Research Policy, Vol. 37
Nos 6/7, pp. 961-977.
Salter, A., Ter Wal, A.L., Criscuolo, P. and Alexy, O. (2015), “Open for ideation: individual-level
openness and idea generation in R&D”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 32 No. 4,
pp. 488-504.
Scuotto, V., Arrigo, E., Candelo, E. and Nicotra, M. (2019), “Ambidextrous innovation orientation
effected by the digital transformation”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 26 No. 5,
pp. 1121-1140.
Singh, J. and Dhiman, G. (2021), “A survey on cloud computing approaches”, Materials Today:
Proceedings,
Singh, S.K., Gupta, S., Busso, D. and Kamboj, S. (2019), “Top management knowledge value, knowledge
sharing practices, open innovation and organizational performance”, Journal of Business Research,
Vol. 128, pp. 788-798, available at: [Link]/science/article/pii/S0148296319302930
Soto-Acosta, P. (2020), “COVID-19 pandemic: shifting digital transformation to a high-speed gear”,
Information Systems Management, Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 260-266.
Sultan, N. (2013), “Knowledge management in the age of cloud computing and web 2.0: experiencing
the power of disruptive innovations”, International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 33 No. 1,
pp. 160-165.
Tella, A., Ukwoma, S.C. and Adeniyi, I.K. (2020), “A two models modification for determining cloud
computing adoption for web-based services in academic libraries in Nigeria”, The Journal of Academic
Librarianship, Vol. 46 No. 6, p. 102255.
Tian, Y., Tian, J. and Li, N. (2020), “Cloud reliability and efficiency improvement via failure risk based
proactive actions”, Journal of Systems and Software, Vol. 163, p. 110524, available at: www.
[Link]/science/article/pii/S0164121220300078
Torraco, R.J. (2000), “A theory of knowledge management”, Advances in Developing Human Resources,
Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 38-62.
Uden, L. and He, W. (2017), “How the internet of things can help knowledge management: a case study
from the automotive domain”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 57-70.

Wang, S. and Wang, H. (2019), “Knowledge management for cybersecurity in business organizations: a
case study”, Journal of Computer Information Systems, pp. 1-8.
Wang, S. and Wang, H. (2020), “Big data for small and medium-sized enterprises (SME): a knowledge
management model”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 881-897.
Wang, S., Liu, Z., Sun, Q., Zou, H. and Yang, F. (2014), “Towards an accurate evaluation of quality of
cloud service in service-oriented cloud computing”, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Vol. 25 No. 2,
pp. 283-291.
Webster, J. and Watson, R.T. (2002), “Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: writing a literature
review”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. xiii-xxiii.
Wee, J.C. and Chua, A.Y. (2013), “The peculiarities of knowledge management processes in SMEs: the
case of Singapore”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 17 No. 6, pp. 958-972.
Yap, J.B.H. and Lock, A. (2017), “Analysing the benefits, techniques, tools and challenges of knowledge
management practices in the Malaysian construction SMEs”, Journal of Engineering, Design and
Technology, Vol. 15 No. 6, pp. 803-825.

VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2691

 Appendix

Table A1 Table listing selected articles details

Article ID Title

Journals
J1 Moorthy, S & Polley, DE 2010, “Technological knowledge breadth and depth: performance impacts”, Journal of
Knowledge Management, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 359-77.
J2 Irum, A & Pandey, A 2019, “Social media – Changing the face of knowledge management”, Development and Learning
in Organizations: An International Journal, vol. ahead-of-print, no. ahead-of-print.
J3 Spender, J-C, Corvello, V, Grimaldi, M & Rippa, P 2017, “Startups and open innovation: a review of the literature”,
European Journal of Innovation Management, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 4-30.
J4 Al-Jabri, H & Al-Busaidi, KA 2018, “Inter-organizational knowledge transfer in Omani SMEs: influencing factors”, VINE
Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 333-51.
J5 Muniz, J, Dias Batista, E & Loureiro, G 2010, “Knowledge-based integrated production management model”, Journal of
Knowledge Management, vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 858-71.
J6 Vuori, V, Schiuma, G & Okkonen, J 2012, “Refining information and knowledge by social media applications”, Vine,
vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 117-28.
J7 Le Dinh, T, Rinfret, L, Raymond, L & Dong Thi, BT 2013, “Towards the reconciliation of knowledge management and e-
collaboration systems”, Interactive Technology and Smart Education, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 95-115.
J8 de Kervenoael, R, Bisson, C & Palmer, M 2015, “Dissidents with an innovation cause? Non-institutionalized actors’ online
social knowledge sharing, solution-finding tensions and technology management innovation”, Information Technology &
People, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 653-76.
J9 Yap, JBH & Lock, A 2017, “Analysing the benefits, techniques, tools and challenges of knowledge management
practices in the Malaysian construction SMEs”, Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, vol. 15, no. 6,
pp. 803-25.
J10 Haraldsdottir, RK & Gunnlaugsdottir, J 2018, “The missing link in information and records management: personal
knowledge registration”, Records Management Journal, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 79-98.
J11 Zhang, G & Tang, C 2017, “How could firm’s internal R&D collaboration bring more innovation?”, Technological
Forecasting and Social Change, vol. 125, pp. 299-308.
J12 Jøranli, I 2018, “Managing organisational knowledge through recruitment: searching and selecting embodied
competencies”, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 183-200.
J13 An, X, Bai, W, Deng, H, Sun, S, Zhong, W & Dong, Y 2017, “A knowledge management framework for effective
integration of national archives resources in China”, Journal of Documentation, vol. 73, no. 1, pp. 18-34.
J14 Liu, C-H, Wang, JS & Lin, C-W 2017, “The concepts of big data applied in personal knowledge management”, Journal of
Knowledge Management, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 213-30.
J15 Madanayake, UH & Egbu, C 2019, “Critical analysis for big data studies in construction: significant gaps in knowledge”,
Built Environment Project and Asset Management.
J16 Majeed, A, Lv, J & Peng, T 2019, “A framework for big data driven process analysis and optimization for additive
manufacturing”, Rapid Prototyping Journal, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 308-21.
J17 Yigitbasioglu, O 2016, “Firms’ information system characteristics and management accounting adaptability”,
International Journal of Accounting & Information Management, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 20-37.
J18 Centobelli, P, Cerchione, R & Esposito, E 2019, “Measuring the use of knowledge management systems in supply
firms”, Measuring Business Excellence, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 426-41.
J19 Kaltenthaler, D, Lohrer, J-Y, Richter, F & Kröger, P 2018, “Interdisciplinary knowledge cohesion through distributed
information management systems”, Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, vol. 16, no. 4,
pp. 413-26.
J20 Glavas, C, Mathews, S & Russell-Bennett, R 2019, “Knowledge acquisition via internet-enabled platforms”, International
Marketing Review, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 74-107.
J21 Li, Z, Wang, WM, Liu, G, Liu, L, He, J & Huang, GQ 2018, “Toward open manufacturing”, Industrial Management & Data
Systems, vol. 118, no. 1, pp. 303-20.
J22 Pauleen, DJ & Wang, WYC 2017, “Does big data mean big knowledge? KM perspectives on big data and analytics”,
Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 1-6.
J23 Rathi, D & Given, LM 2017, “Non-profit organizations’ use of tools and technologies for knowledge management: a
comparative study”, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 718-40.
J24 Tsang, YP, Choy, KL, Koo, PS, Ho, GTS, Wu, CH, Lam, HY & Tang, V 2018, “A fuzzy association rule-based knowledge
management system for occupational safety and health programs in cold storage facilities”, VINE Journal of Information
and Knowledge Management Systems, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 199-216.
(continued)

PAGE 2692 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022

Table A1
Article ID Title

J25 Al-Busaidi, K.A. and Olfman, L., 2017. Knowledge sharing through inter-organizational knowledge sharing
systems. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems.
J26 Ju, D & Shen, B 2015, “Library as knowledge ecosystem”, Library Management, vol. 36, no. 4/5, pp. 329-39.
J27 Chua, Y, K, Alton & Wee, C, N, Janet 2013, “The peculiarities of knowledge management processes in SMEs: the case
of Singapore”, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 958-72.
J28 Philip, J 2018, “An application of the dynamic knowledge creation model in big data”, Technology in Society, vol. 54,
pp. 120-7.
J29 Nguyen, HL & Jung, JE 2018, “SocioScope: A framework for understanding Internet of Social Knowledge”, Future
Generation Computer Systems, vol. 83, pp. 358-65.
J30 Whitmore, A 2012, “Extracting knowledge from U.S. department of defense freedom of information act requests with
social media”, Government Information Quarterly, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 151-7.
J31 Villani, V, Sabattini, L, Levratti, A & Fantuzzi, C 2018, “An Industrial Social Network for Sharing Knowledge Among
Operators”, IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 51, no. 11, pp. 48-53.
J32 Du, H, Xu, W, Yao, B, Zhou, Z & Hu, Y 2019, “Collaborative Optimization of Service Scheduling for Industrial Cloud
Robotics Based on Knowledge Sharing”, Procedia CIRP, vol. 83, pp. 132-8.
J33 Moreira, F, Mesquita, A & Peres, P 2017, “Customized X-Learning environment: social networks & knowledge-sharing
tools”, Procedia Computer Science, vol. 121, pp. 178-85.
J34 Liu, J, Zhang, Z, Evans, R & Xie, Y 2019, “Web services-based knowledge sharing, reuse and integration in the design
evaluation of mechanical systems”, Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, vol. 57, pp. 271-81.
J35 Garcı́a-Peñalvo, FJ & Conde, MÁ 2014, “Using informal learning for business decision making and knowledge
management”, Journal of Business Research, vol. 67, no. 5, pp. 686-91.
J36 Papadopoulos, T, Baltas, KN & Balta, ME 2020, “The use of digital technologies by small and medium enterprises
during COVID-19: Implications for theory and practice”, International Journal of Information Management, vol. 55,
p. 102192.
J37 Lankton, NK, Speier, C & Wilson, EV 2012, “Internet-based knowledge acquisition: Task complexity and performance”,
Decision Support Systems, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 55-65.
J38 Tamjidyamcholo, A, Bin Baba, MS, Shuib, NLM & Rohani, VA 2014, “Evaluation model for knowledge sharing in
information security professional virtual community”, Computers & Security, vol. 43, pp. 19-34.
J39 Maravilhas, S & Martins, J 2019, “Strategic knowledge management in a digital environment: Tacit and explicit
knowledge in Fab Labs”, Journal of Business Research, vol. 94, pp. 353-9.
J40 Xiong, C, Chang, V, Scuotto, V, Shi, Y & Paoloni, N 2019, “The social-psychological approach in understanding
knowledge hiding within international R&D teams: An inductive analysis”, Journal of Business Research.
J41 Acharya, A, Singh, SK, Pereira, V & Singh, P 2018, “Big data, knowledge co-creation and decision making in fashion
industry”, International Journal of Information Management, vol. 42, pp. 90-101.
J42 Dixon, BE, Simonaitis, L, Goldberg, HS, Paterno, MD, Schaeffer, M, Hongsermeier, T, Wright, A & Middleton, B 2013, “A
pilot study of distributed knowledge management and clinical decision support in the cloud”, Artificial Intelligence in
Medicine, vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 45-53.
J43 Palacios-Marqués, D, Soto-Acosta, P & Merigo , JM 2015, “Analyzing the effects of technological, organizational and
competition factors on Web knowledge exchange in SMEs”, Telematics and Informatics, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 23-32.
J44 Arpaci, I 2017, “Antecedents and consequences of cloud computing adoption in education to achieve knowledge
management”, Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 70, pp. 382-90.
J45 Dessı̀, N, Milia, G, Pascariello, E & Pes, B 2016, “COWB: A cloud-based framework supporting collaborative knowledge
management within biomedical communities”, Future Generation Computer Systems, vol. 54, pp. 399-408.
J46 Al-Emran, M, Mezhuyev, V, Kamaludin, A & Shaalan, K 2018, “The impact of knowledge management processes on
information systems: A systematic review”, International Journal of Information Management, vol. 43, pp. 173-87.
J47 Sultan, N. (2013). Knowledge management in the age of cloud computing and Web 2.0: Experiencing the power of
disruptive innovations. International Journal of Information Management, vol.33, no.1, pp.160-165.
J48 Gast, J., Gundolf, K., Harms, R., & Matos Collado, E. (2019). Knowledge management and coopetition: How do
cooperating competitors balance the needs to share and protect their knowledge? Industrial Marketing Management,
vol.77, pp.65-74.
J49 Jafari Navimipour, N., Rahmani, A. M., Habibizad Navin, A., & Hosseinzadeh, M. (2015). Expert Cloud: A Cloud-based
framework to share the knowledge and skills of human resources. Computers in Human Behavior, vol.46, pp.57-74.
J50 Cerchione, R., & Esposito, E. (2017). Using knowledge management systems: A taxonomy of SME strategies.
International Journal of Information Management, vol.37, no.1, pp.1551-1562.
J51 Kane, G. C. (2017). The evolutionary implications of social media for organizational knowledge management.
Information and Organization, vol.27, no.1.
J52 Calegari, S., Avogadro, P., & Dominoni, M. (2017). Building a knowledge portal for communities based on personalized
functionalities. Computers in Industry, vol.92, pp.194-207.
(continued)

VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2693

 Table A1
Article ID Title

J53 Barcelo-Valenzuela, M., Carrillo-Villafaña, P. S., Perez-Soltero, A., & Sanchez-Schmitz, G. (2016). A framework to
acquire explicit knowledge stored on different versions of software. Information and Software Technology, vol.70,
pp.40-48.
J54 von Krogh, G. (2012). How does social software change knowledge management? Toward a strategic research
agenda. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, vol.21, no.2, pp.154-164.
J55 Va squez-Bravo, D.-M., Sa nchez-Segura, M.-I., Medina-Domı́nguez, F., & Amescua, A. (2014). Knowledge management
acquisition improvement by using software engineering elicitation techniques. Computers in Human Behavior, vol.30,
pp.721-730.
J56 Benitez, J., Castillo, A., Llorens, J., & Braojos, J. (2018). IT-enabled knowledge ambidexterity and innovation
performance in small U.S. firms: The moderator role of social media capability. Information & Management, vol.55, no.1,
pp.131–143.
J57 Abubakar, A. M., Behravesh, E., Rezapouraghdam, H., & Yildiz, S. B. (2019). Applying artificial intelligence technique to
predict knowledge hiding behavior. International Journal of Information Management, vol.49, pp.45-57.
J58 Stantchev, V., Prieto-Gonza lez, L., & Tamm, G. (2015). Cloud computing service for knowledge assessment and studies
recommendation in crowdsourcing and collaborative learning environments based on social network analysis.
Computers in Human Behavior, vol.51, pp.762-770.
J59 Aussenac-Gilles, N., & Gandon, F. (2013). From the knowledge acquisition bottleneck to the knowledge acquisition
overflow: A brief French history of knowledge acquisition. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, vol.71,
no.2, pp.157-165.
J60 Gemignani, G., Capobianco, R., Bastianelli, E., Bloisi, D. D., Iocchi, L., & Nardi, D. (2016). Living with robots: Interactive
environmental knowledge acquisition. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, vol.78, pp.1-16.
J61 Peng, J., Jiang, D., & Zhang, X. (2013). Design and Implement a Knowledge Management System to Support Web-
based Learning in Higher Education. Procedia Computer Science, vol.22, pp.95-103.
J62 Venturini, R., Ceccagnoli, M., & van Zeebroeck, N. (2019). Knowledge integration in the shadow of tacit spillovers:
Empirical evidence from U.S. R&D labs. Research Policy, vol.48, no.1, pp.180-205.
J63 Mourtzis, D., Doukas, M., & Giannoulis, C. (2016). An inference-based knowledge reuse framework for historical
product and production information retrieval. Procedia CIRP, vol.41, pp.472-477.
J64 Limaj, E., Bernroider, E. W. N., & Choudrie, J. (2016). The impact of social information system governance, utilization,
and capabilities on absorptive capacity and innovation: A case of Austrian SMEs. Information & Management, vol.53,
no.3, pp.380-397.
J65 Suarez-Ortega, S, Garcia-Cabrera, A & Knight, G 2015, “A model of knowledge acquisition for developed economies
SMEs first entering a developing economy”, Procedia Economics and Finance, vol. 23, pp. 33-7.
J66 Yang, X., Li, J., & Xing, B. (2018). Behavioral patterns of knowledge construction in online cooperative translation
activities. The Internet and Higher Education, vol.36, pp.13-21.
J67 Demangeot, C., Sankaran, K. and Tagg, S., 2019. Knowledge sharing and accumulation dynamics in autonomous
online consumer communities: Individual and collective levels. Recherche et Applications en Marketing (English
Edition), vol.34, no.4, pp.50-73.
J68 Cram, W. A., & Marabelli, M. (2018). Have your cake and eat it too? Simultaneously pursuing the knowledge-sharing
benefits of agile and traditional development approaches. Information & Management, vol.55, no.3, pp.322-339.
J69 Keith, M., Demirkan, H., & Goul, M. (2010). The influence of collaborative technology knowledge on advice network
structures. Decision Support Systems, vol.50, no.1, pp.140-151.
J70 Hu, Y.-F., Hou, J.-L., & Chien, C.-F. (2019). A UNISON framework for knowledge management of university–industry
collaboration and an illustration. Computers & Industrial Engineering, vol.129, pp.31-43.
J71 Schniederjans, D. G., Curado, C., & Khalajhedayati, M. (2019). Supply chain digitisation trends: An integration of
knowledge management. International Journal of Production Economics.
J72 Menkhoff, T., Chay, Y. W., Bengtsson, M. L., Woodard, C. J., & Gan, B. (2015). Incorporating microblogging (“tweeting”)
in higher education: Lessons learnt in a knowledge management course. Computers in Human Behavior, vol.51,
pp.1295-1302.
J73 Hong, D. C., & Liang, S. (2015). Media Characteristics and Social Networks-enabled Knowledge Integration in
Cooperative Work. Procedia Computer Science, vol.60, pp.246-255.
J74 Kolerova , K., & Otc
enaškova , T. (2015). Case Studies of Sharing Processes within Organisations. Procedia Economics
and Finance, vol.23, pp.256-261.
J75 Ballestar, M. T., Dı́az-Chao, Á., Sainz, J., & Torrent-Sellens, J. (2020). Knowledge, robots and productivity in SMEs:
Explaining the second digital wave. Journal of Business Research, vol.108, pp.119-131.
J76 Urbinati, A., Bogers, M., Chiesa, V., & Frattini, F. (2019). Creating and capturing value from Big Data: A multiple-case
study analysis of provider companies. Technovation, vol.84-85, pp.21-36.
J77 Carvalho, N., & Gomes, I. (2017). Knowledge Sharing between Enterprises of the Same Group. International Journal of
Knowledge Management, vol.13, no.1, pp.34-52.
(continued)

PAGE 2694 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022

Table A1
Article ID Title

J78 Lisanti, Y., Luhukay, D., & Mariani, V. (2014). The design of knowledge management system model for SME (Small and
Medium Enterprise) (Phase 2—The pilot implementation in IT SMEs). Paper presented at the 2014 2nd International
Conference on Information and Communication Technology (ICoICT).
J79 Harncharnchai, A. (2018). Postgraduate’s Personal Knowledge Management Using Cloud Services. Paper presented at
the 2018 International Symposium on Educational Technology (ISET).
J80 Gu, X., Yang, L., & Cao, S. (2018). Design and implementation of knowledge sharing system based on WeChat small
program. Paper presented at the 2018 IEEE 3rd Advanced Information Technology, Electronic and Automation Control
Conference (IAEAC).
J81 Julpisit, A., & Esichaikul, V. (2018). A collaborative system to improve knowledge sharing in scientific research projects.
Information Development, vol.35, no.4, pp.624-638
J82 Lee, V.-H., Foo, A. T.-L., Leong, L.-Y., & Ooi, K.-B. (2016). Can competitive advantage be achieved through knowledge
management? A case study on SMEs. Expert Systems with Applications, vol.65, pp.136-151.
J83 Chan, J. O. (2014). Big data customer knowledge management. Communications of the IIMA, vol.14, no.3, pp.5.
J84 Shehab, S., Rahim, R. E. A., & Daud, S. (2018). A Review of Individual Factors on Knowledge Sharing: Evidence from
the Empirical Literature. International Journal of Engineering and Technology (UAE), vol.7, no.4, pp.186-194.
J85 Charband, Y., & Jafari Navimipour, N. (2016). Online knowledge sharing mechanisms: a systematic review of the
state-of-the-art literature and recommendations for future research. Information Systems Frontiers, vol.18, no.6,
pp.1131-1151.
J86 Ghasemaghaei, M. (2019). Does data analytics use improve firm decision making quality? The role of knowledge
sharing and data analytics competency. Decision Support Systems, vol.120, pp.14-24.
J87 Mamorobela, S., & Buckley, S. (2018). Evaluating the Effectiveness of Social Media on Knowledge Management
Systems for SMEs. Paper presented at the European Conference on Knowledge Management.
J88 Garcı́a-Sa nchez, E., Garcı́a-Morales, V. J., & Bolı́var-Ramos, M. T. (2015). The influence of top management support for
ICTs on organisational performance through knowledge acquisition, transfer, and utilisation. Review of Managerial
Science, vol.11, no.1, pp.19-51.
J89 Pérez-Gonza lez, D., Trigueros-Preciado, S., & Popa, S. (2017). Social Media Technologies’ Use for the Competitive
Information and Knowledge Sharing, and Its Effects on Industrial SMEs’ Innovation. Information Systems Management,
vol.34, no.3, pp.291-301.
J90 Mostefai, M. A., Annane, A., Kissoum, L., & Ahmed-Nacer, M. (2015). Implementing knowledge management systems in
cloud-based environments: A case study in a computer science high school. Paper presented at the 2015 International
Conference on Cloud Technologies and Applications (CloudTech).
J91 Jonsson, A. (2017). Beyond knowledge management – understanding how to share knowledge through logic and
practice. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, vol.13, no.1, pp45-58.
J92 Centobelli, P., Cerchione, R., & Esposito, E. (2019). Efficiency and effectiveness of knowledge management systems in
SMEs. Production Planning & Control, vol.30, no.9, pp.779-791.
J93 Wang, S., & Wang, H. (2019). Knowledge Management for Cybersecurity in Business Organizations: A Case Study.
Journal of Computer Information Systems, pp.1–8.
J94 Kimmerle, J., Cress, U., & Held, C. (2017). The interplay between individual and collective knowledge: technologies for
organisational learning and knowledge building. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, vol.8, no.1, pp.33-44.
J95 Marwa, B., Mohamed, A., Ikbal, M., Vincent, C., & Mohamed, H. (2017). KSim: An information system for knowledge
management in Digital Factory. Concurrent Engineering, vol.25, no.4, pp.303-315.
J96 Bohlouli, M., Dalter, J., Dornhöfer, M., Zenkert, J., & Fathi, M. (2015). Knowledge discovery from social media using big
data-provided sentiment analysis (SoMABiT). Journal of Information Science, vol.41, no.6, pp.779-798.
J97 Chen, M., & Zhang, W. (2019). WeChat knowledge service system of university library based on SoLoMo: A holistic
design framework. Journal of Information Science.
J98 Terhorst, A., Lusher, D., Bolton, D., Elsum, I., & Wang, P. (2018). Tacit Knowledge Sharing in Open Innovation Projects.
Project Management Journal, vol.49, no.4, pp.5-19.
J99 Byukusenge, E., Munene, J. and Orobia, L., 2016. Knowledge management and business performance: Mediating
effect of innovation. Journal of Business and Management Sciences, vol.4, no.4, pp.82-92.
J100 Piad-Morffis, A., Gutiérrez, Y., Almeida-Cruz, Y. and Muñoz, R., 2020. A computational ecosystem to support eHealth
Knowledge Discovery technologies in Spanish. Journal of biomedical informatics, vol.109, pp.103517.
J101 Tzavidas, E., Enevoldsen, P. and Xydis, G., 2020. A University-industry knowledge transfer online education approach
via a cloud-based database global solution. Smart Learning Environments, vol.7, no.1, pp.1–16.
J102 Liu, Z.Q., Deryagin, A. and Glushkov, S., 2020. IT-Architecture for Corporate Knowledge Management
Systems. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), vol.15, no.14, pp.65–82.
J103 Recupero, D.R. and Spiga, F., 2020. Knowledge acquisition from parsing natural language expressions for humanoid
robot action commands. Information Processing & Management, vol.57, no. 6, p.102094.
(continued)

VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2695

 Table A1
Article ID Title

J104 Agrawal, N., 2020. Modeling enablers of knowledge management process using multi criteria decision making
approach. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems.
J105 Serino, L., Papa, A., Campanella, F. and Di Gioia, L., 2020. The sourcing for collaborative knowledge translation in
distributed R&D processes: a cross-regional study. Management Decision.
J106 Ciampi, F., Marzi, G., Demi, S. and Faraoni, M., 2020. The big data-business strategy interconnection: a grand
challenge for knowledge management. A review and future perspectives. Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 24
no. 5, pp. 1157–1176.
J107 Ferreira, J., Coelho, A. and Moutinho, L., 2020. The influence of strategic alliances on innovation and new product
development through the effects of exploration and exploitation. Management Decision.
J108 Pellegrini, M.M., Ciampi, F., Marzi, G. and Orlando, B., 2020. The relationship between knowledge management and
leadership: mapping the field and providing future research avenues. Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 24 no. 6,
pp. 1445–1492.
J109 Mohamed, M.A., 2020. Persuasion of tacit knowledge in teaching information technology and information systems. VINE
Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems.
J110 Fote, F.N., Roukh, A., Mahmoudi, S., Mahmoudi, S.A. and Debauche, O., 2020. Toward a Big Data Knowledge-Base
Management System for Precision Livestock Farming. Procedia Computer Science, vol.177, pp.136–142.
J111 Mansouri, N., Javidi, M.M. and Zade, B.M.H., 2019. Using data mining techniques to improve replica management in
cloud environment. Soft Computing, pp.1–26.
J112 Hossain, B.A., Salam, A. and Schwitter, R., 2018. A survey on automatically constructed universal knowledge
bases. Journal of Information Science, p.0165551520921342.
J113 Rialti, R., Marzi, G., Caputo, A. and Mayah, K.A., 2020. Achieving strategic flexibility in the era of big data. Management
Decision.
J114 Bosco, F.A., Field, J.G., Larsen, K.R., Chang, Y. and Uggerslev, K.L., 2020. Advancing meta-analysis with knowledge-
management platforms: Using metaBUS in psychology. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological
Science, vol.3, no.1, pp.124–137.
J115 Liu, F. and Wang, J., 2020. An ambidexterity perspective toward configurations of knowledge flows: an empirical testing
of its two-phase performance implications. Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 24 no. 5, pp. 1005–1035.
J116 Najar, T., 2020. Antecedents to open business model in the ICT-based sectors. The Journal of High Technology
Management Research, p.100388.
J117 Eller, R., Alford, P., Kallmünzer, A. and Peters, M., 2020. Antecedents, consequences, and challenges of small and
medium-sized enterprise digitalization. Journal of Business Research, vol.112, pp.119–127.
J118 Cerchione, R., Centobelli, P., Zerbino, P. and Anand, A., 2020. Back to the future of Knowledge Management Systems
off the beaten paths. Management Decision.
J119 Francesco, C, Giacomo, M, Stefano, D & Faraoni, M 2020, “The big data-business strategy interconnection: a grand
challenge for knowledge management. A review and future perspectives”, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 24
no. 5, pp. 1157–76.
J120 Junior, E.M., Gobbo, J.A., Fukunaga, F., Cerchione, R. and Centobelli, P., 2020. Use of knowledge management
systems: analysis of the strategies of Brazilian small and medium enterprises. Journal of Knowledge Management, vol.
24 no. 2, pp. 369–394.
J121 Deng, C-P, Wang, T, Teo, TS & Song, Q 2021, “Organizational agility through outsourcing: Roles of IT alignment, cloud
computing and knowledge transfer”, International Journal of Information Management, vol. 60, p. 102385.
J122 Briken, K 2020, “Welcome in the machine: Human–machine relations and knowledge capture”, Capital & Class, vol. 44,
no. 2, pp. 159–71.
J123 Asiaei, K, Rezaee, Z, Bontis, N, Barani, O & Sapiei, NS 2021, “Knowledge assets, capabilities and performance
measurement systems: a resource orchestration theory approach”, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 25 no. 8,
pp. 1947–1976.
J124 Zhou, F, He, Y, Ma, P & Mahto, RV 2020, “Knowledge management practice of medical cloud logistics industry:
transportation resource semantic discovery based on ontology modelling”, Journal of intellectual capital.
J125 Zheng, J, Qiao, H, Zhu, X & Wang, S 2020, “Knowledge-driven business model innovation through the introduction of
equity investment: evidence from China’s primary market”, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 25, no. 1 2021,
pp. 251–268
J126 Jiang, N, Tian, E, Malayeri, FD & Balali, A 2020, “A new model for investigating the impact of urban knowledge, urban
intelligent transportation systems and IT infrastructures on the success of SCM systems in the distributed
organizations”, Kybernetes.
J127 Chin, T, Wang, S & Rowley, C 2021, “Polychronic knowledge creation in cross-border business models: a sea-like
heuristic metaphor”, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 1–22.
(continued)

PAGE 2696 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022

Table A1
Article ID Title

J128 Halisah, A, Jayasingam, S, Ramayah, T & Popa, S 2021, “Social dilemmas in knowledge sharing: an examination of the
interplay between knowledge sharing culture and performance climate”, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 25 no.
7, pp. 1708–1725.
J129 Liu, Z-Q, Dorozhkin, E, Davydova, N & Sadovnikova, N 2020, “Effectiveness of the Partial Implementation of a Cloud-
Based Knowledge Management System”, International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), vol. 15,
no. 13, pp. 155–71.
J130 Wang, S. and Wang, H., 2020. Big data for small and medium-sized enterprises (SME): a knowledge management
model. Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 24 no. 4, pp. 881–897.
J131 Bohlouli, M & Hellekes, S 2020, “Cloud-enabled Multimodal Knowledge Modeling and Acquisition for Education and
Learning (KaaS)”, 2020 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data), IEEE, pp. 1–7.
J132 Ashok, M, Al, MSMAB, Madan, R & Dzandu, MD 2021, “How to counter organisational inertia to enable knowledge
management practices adoption in public sector organisations”, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 25 no. 9, pp.
2245–2273.
J133 Saniuk, S, Caganova, D & Saniuk, A 2021, “Knowledge and Skills of Industrial Employees and Managerial Staff for the
Industry 4.0 Implementation”, Mobile Networks and Applications, pp. 1–11.
Conference Proceedings
C1 Ali, S., Green, P., & Robb, A. 2011. Top Management IT Governance Knowledge: A Construct Development. Twenty
Second Australasian Conference on Information Systems. Australia
C2 Kim, D. J., & Yang, T. A. 2010. A New Approach for Collaborative Knowledge Management: A Unified Conceptual Model
for Collaborative Knowledge Management. Americas Conference on Information Systems, Lima, Peru
C3 Noume, S, Loic, F, Large, J & Hodges-McDaniel, BA 2018, “A portfolio of knowledge integration mechanisms in open
ecosystems”, Twenty-fourth Americas Conference on Information Systems, New Orleans.
C4 Baker, M., Ali, Ellis, J, Timothy. (2018). The Interaction Between Organizational Culture and Knowledge Sharing via
Socialization in a Technology Company. Twenty-fourth Americas Conference on Information Systems, New Orleans.
C5 Klotz, S., Westner, M., Strahringer, S., & Schieder, C. (2019). Transformed Knowledge Sharing Through Business-
managed IT and Shadow IT. Twenty-fifth Americas Conference on Information Systems, Cancun
C6 Hsu, C.-S., Min, H., & Chou, S.-W. (2017). Understanding Knowledge Outcome Improvement in Virtual Communities: An
Integrative Model from a Relational Development Perspective. Twenty-third Americas Conference on Information
Systems, Boston
C7 Le Dinh, T., Phan, T.-C., & Bui, T. (2016). Towards an architecture for big data-driven knowledge management systems.
Twenty-second Americas Conference on Information Systems, San Diego
C8 Kramer, F., Klingner, S., Becker, M., & Friedrich, J. (2016). The state of SME knowledge management-a multiple case
study analysis. Twenty-second Americas Conference on Information Systems, San Diego
C9 Jensen, M., Durcikova, A., & Wright, R. (2017). Combating phishing attacks: A knowledge management approach. 50th
Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Hawaii, United States of America.
C10 Zalk, M., Bosua, R., & Sharma, R. (2011). Improving knowledge sharing behaviour within organizations: towards a
model.
C11 Moos, B., Beimborn, D., Wagner, H.-T., & Weitzel, T. (2011). Knowledge management systems, absorptive capacity,
and innovation success. Paper presented at the ECIS.
C12 O Riordan, N. (2013). Knowledge creation: hidden driver of innovation in the digital era. Paper presented at the
International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS) 2013: Reshaping Society Through Information Systems Design,
Milan, Italy, 15–18 December 2013.
C13 Davison, R. & Ou, C., (2011). Investigating transactive memory shaped by knowledge management tools-proposing a
longitudinal study in China. Paper presented at European Conference on Information Systems Proceedings
C14 Yu, A. Y., Hao, J.-X., Dong, X.-Y., & Khalifa, M. (2010). Revisiting the effect of social capital on knowledge sharing in
work teams: A multilevel approach.
C15 Salovaara, A., & Tuunainen, V. K. (2013). Software developers’ online chat as an intra-firm mechanism for sharing
ephemeral knowledge.
C16 Lee, K. Y., Lee, M., Bassellier, G., & Faraj, S. (2010). The Impact of Emotional Expressions on Knowledge Creation in
Online Communities. Paper presented at the ICIS.
C17 Loebbecke, C. and Crowston, K., 2012. Knowledge portals: components, functionalities, and deployment challenges.
C18 Park, A., Kang, M. S., & Lee, K. J. (2015). Case Study on the Enterprise Microblog Usage: Focusing on Knowledge
Learning. Paper presented at the PACIS.
C19 Gururajan, R., Tsai, H.-S., Hafeez-Baig, A., & Lin, M.-K. (2010). Knowledge sharing and management for better
organisational outcomes: an Indian study. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 14th Pacific Asia Conference on
Information Systems (PACIS 2010).
C20 De Leoz, G., & Petter, S. (2014). Examining the moderating effects of knowledge management enablers on IT project
team performance. Paper presented at the 20th Americas Conference on Information Systems, AMCIS 2014.
(continued)

VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2697

 Table A1
Article ID Title

C21 Oliveira, Mirian; Curado, Carla; Balle, Andrea Raymundo; Nodari, Felipe; and Silva de Garcia, Plinio, (2020). Knowledge
sharing and knowledge protection in inter-organizational collaboration: uncovering the underlying relationships that
influence innovation. ECIS 2020 Research-in-Progress Papers. 10, [Link]
C22 Juan, Shih-Jung and Lin, Wootsong. (2020). “Tacit Knowledge Acquisition in Organizations”. PACIS 2020 Proceedings.
178. [Link]
C23 Lokuge, S. and Subasinghage, M., 2020. Knowledge Management Competence and ISD Vendor Innovativeness in
Turbulent Markets. Australasian Conference on Information Systems Proceedings. 72, [Link]
72
C24 Jennex, M.E. and Durcikova, A., 2020. Knowledge Systems and Risk Management: Towards a Risk and Threat
Assessment Framework. In Current Issues and Trends in Knowledge Management, Discovery, and Transfer. Paper
presented at the 53rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences pp. 367–385.

About the authors

Minu Saratchandra is a PhD research candidate at the School of Business, the University of
Southern Queensland. Minu is pursuing her doctoral research in information systems and
her teaching and research interests include Knowledge Management, Cloud Computing,
Ambidexterity, System Analysis and Design and Enterprise Systems. She has six years of
professional experience in the field of Information Technology in various organisations.

Anup Shrestha, PhD is a senior lecturer at the School of Business, University of Southern
Queensland (USQ). He completed his PhD in Information Systems (IS) as part of an
Australian Research Council (ARC) Industry Linkage project from USQ and Griffith
University in Queensland, Australia. His PhD was awarded the best Australian thesis in IS
by the ACPHIS (Australian Council of Professors and Heads of Information Systems) in
2016. With eight years of IT industry experience prior to academic appointment, Anup
currently specialises in interdisciplinary research areas with the focus on IS and its impact
on business, society and specialist domains such as health and management practices. He
has published over 50 peer-reviewed articles including at highly ranked academic journals
such as Information & Management, International Journal of Information Management and
Government Information Quarterly and Computer Standards & Interfaces. Anup is also
currently serving as the Standards Australia national representative for the development
and review of ISO standards in software engineering. Anup Shrestha is the corresponding
author and can be contacted at: [Link]@[Link]

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
[Link]/licensing/[Link]
Or contact us for further details: permissions@[Link]

PAGE 2698 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 26 NO. 10 2022