International Journal of Information Management 43 (2018) 173–187

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Information Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijinfomgt

The impact of knowledge management processes on information systems: A T

systematic review
⁎
Mostafa Al-Emrana, , Vitaliy Mezhuyeva, Adzhar Kamaludina, Khaled Shaalanb
a
Faculty of Computer Systems & Software Engineering, Universiti Malaysia Pahang, Pahang, Malaysia
b
Faculty of Engineering & IT, The British University in Dubai, Dubai, United Arab Emirates

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Knowledge Management (KM) processes play a significant role in the implementation of various Information
Knowledge management processes Systems (IS). Several review studies were carried out to afford a better understanding of the current research
Information systems trend of KM processes. However, this issue still needs to be examined from other perspectives. It is observed that
Systematic review previous research neglects the examination of KM processes studies with regard to ISs. The current study sys-
tematically reviews and sheds the light on KM processes studies related to ISs aiming to provide a comprehensive
analysis of 41 research articles published in peer-reviewed journals from 2001 to 2018. The main findings of this
study indicate that knowledge sharing is the most frequent KM process studied, followed by knowledge ac-
quisition and knowledge application. Besides, questionnaire surveys were found to be the primarily relied re-
search methods for data collection in the context of KM processes. In addition, 78% of the analyzed studies
registered positive research outcomes. In terms of IS type, most of the analyzed studies focused on investigating
the impact of KM processes on E-business systems, knowledge management systems, and IS outsourcing, re-
spectively. Additionally, in terms of data collection, the majority of the analyzed studies were primarily focused
on the participants who are IS executives/managers. Furthermore, most of the analyzed studies that achieved
positive outcomes were carried out in China. To that end, this review study attempts to demonstrate and detail
the recent increase in the interest and the advancement made in KM processes research considering ISs studies,
which form an essential reference for scholars in KM field.

1. Introduction capability to acquire valuable knowledge are more likely to use and
implement an information system (Migdadi, Abu Zaid, Al-Hujran, &
Information Systems (IS) offer a wide range of opportunities for Aloudat, 2016). It is argued that knowledge sharing is the central
institutions to automate, produce, and share their knowledge effectively process of KM and the successful implementation of KM highly depends
(Rahimi, Møller, & Hvam, 2016). The successful implementation of a on this type of knowledge (Assegaff, Hussin, & Dahlan, 2011). Knowl-
particular IS can only be accomplished when knowledge and resources edge sharing is defined as the institution processes that disseminate
are managed sufficiently (Kwon & Zmud, 1987). Within this scenario, knowledge among all individuals taking a part in the activities of a
ISs play a key role in the development of KM (Cerchione & Esposito, particular process (Lee et al., 2007; Migdadi et al., 2016). Kim (2012)
2017). It is claimed that KM processes are the fundamental processes pointed out that individuals who share knowledge frequently are more
for improving the capabilities of a particular technology, and the suc- likely to use an IS. Besides, Lin and Lee (2005) indicated that the in-
cessful adoption and implementation of such technology increasingly stitutional willingness of knowledge sharing would facilitate the pro-
depends on the efficient use of these processes (Colomo-Palacios, cess of technology adoption. Lee et al. (2007) defined knowledge ap-
Fernandes, Soto-Acosta, & Larrucea, 2018; Lee, Lee, & Lin, 2007). Re- plication as the institution processes that enable the institution to access
searchers have introduced different KM processes, each of which, the knowledge smoothly via its efficient storage and retrieval techni-
contributes to the efficient use of ISs. Knowledge acquisition is defined ques. Institutions that stimulate the knowledge application are highly
as the institution processes that utilize the current knowledge and qualified to the successful adoption and implementation of an IS (Lin &
capture a new knowledge (Lee et al., 2007). Institutions that have the Lee, 2005; Migdadi et al., 2016).

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: malemran@buc.edu.om (M. Al-Emran), vitaliy@ump.edu.my (V. Mezhuyev), adzhar@ump.edu.my (A. Kamaludin),
khaled.shaalan@buid.ac.ae (K. Shaalan).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.08.001
Received 6 October 2017; Received in revised form 2 July 2018; Accepted 1 August 2018
0268-4012/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Al-Emran et al. International Journal of Information Management 43 (2018) 173–187

According to the literature, KM in general and KM processes in increasingly depends on the efficient use of these processes (Lee et al.,
specific play an essential role in facilitating the implementation of 2007). KM processes are considered as the fundamental processes for
many ISs. The existing literature has focused on several perspectives the successful adoption and implementation of a new IS (Chong, Chan,
with respect to KM processes. Various KM processes review studies Goh, & Tiwari, 2013; Lin & Lee, 2005; Migdadi et al., 2016). Informa-
were carried out. It is believed that each of which reviews provides a tion systems can be employed to leverage the KM processes of ac-
valuable synthesis of KM processes, yet further examination is required quiring, storing, sharing, and applying a particular knowledge (Turban,
depending on other research perspectives. It has been noticed that the Sharda, & Delen, 2011). Similarly, Mitchell (2003) demonstrated that
extant review studies neglected the examination of KM processes stu- information technologies could serve as a facilitator of KM. Ad-
dies with regard to ISs. Accordingly, the present study systematically ditionally, it is believed that KM is mainly related to support IS pro-
reviews and synthesizes the KM processes studies related to ISs in order cesses.
to afford a comprehensive analysis of the collected studies. More spe- With regard to KM processes review studies, Edvardsson and Durst
cifically, this review study poses the following five research questions: (2014) carried out a systematic review to analyze studies related to KM
processes outsourcing attempting to build a comprehensive source for
RQ1. What are the main KM processes studied considering their
scholars and to identify the gaps in the existing literature. Costa and
relationship with information systems?
Monteiro (2016) conducted a systematic review to analyze KM pro-
RQ2. What are the main research methods and research outcomes cesses studies taking into account their relationship with innovation.
addressed in the collected studies? Meese and McMahon (2012) carried out a study to systematically re-
view and analyze knowledge sharing studies related to sustainable
RQ3. What types of information systems are mainly studied involving
development aiming to understand the main knowledge sharing con-
KM processes, and what are the types of participants in the collected
cepts and research strategies that were used in the civil engineering
studies?
discipline. Yiu and Law (2014) conducted a systematic review to ana-
RQ4. How are the KM processes studies considering information lyze KM and knowledge sharing studies aiming to address the main
systems are distributed across the countries of implementation and concepts of knowledge, KM, and knowledge sharing in the tourism
the years of publication? sector. Charband and Navimipour (2016) conducted a systematic re-
view to analyze studies related to the main knowledge sharing techni-
RQ5. What are the active databases in the context of KM processes?
ques applied in online environments. Asrar-ul-Haq and Anwar (2016)
carried out a systematic review to analyze studies related to KM and
2. Literature review knowledge sharing aiming to highlight and analyze the factors that
hinder or facilitate KM in organizations. Zahedi, Shahin, and Babar
During the last decade, an enormous number of IS studies has (2016) carried out a systematic review to analyze knowledge sharing
proved the importance of knowledge in organizations (Blumenberg, studies considering their relationship with global software development
Wagner, & Beimborn, 2009). This knowledge was far more important aiming to determine and synthesize the main practices and challenges
than any other assets in the organization; thereby, it needs to be of knowledge sharing.
managed efficiently. Knowledge Management (KM) has become a pre- Based on the existing literature, none of the above review studies
valent research trend in academia and business sector (Al-Emran, have considered the relationship between KM processes and ISs.
Mezhuyev, & Kamaludin, 2018b; Jasimuddin, 2006; McAdam & Nevertheless, different studies were carried out in the past years, each
McCreedy, 1999). KM is defined as "the process of capturing, storing, of which affording substantial information for scholars to well com-
sharing, and using knowledge" (Lee, 2001). With the existence of KM, prehend the impact of KM processes on ISs. It has been noticed that
organizations will be capable to achieve these processes (Hwang, Lin, & research has neglected the review of studies related to KM processes
Shin, 2018). KM is an emerging mechanism that can find particular impact on ISs acceptance, adoption, and implementation. That is the
information more efficiently and organize that information for quick purpose that encouraged us to carry out this systematic review. The
retrieval and reuse (Lee et al., 2007). It is argued that KM is the es- present review study tries to add value to the extant body of literature
sential asset in the modern institutions as it sustains the institutional by covering an up-to-date synthesis of KM processes research studies
learning, growth, success, and innovation (Lee, Shiue, & Chen, 2016). that were mainly focused on the impact of these processes on ISs ac-
According to the literature, different researchers have introduced ceptance, adoption, and implementation.
different KM processes. Spender (1996) stated that KM processes in-
clude: knowledge creation, knowledge transfer, and knowledge appli- 3. Method
cation. DeLong (1997) pointed out that KM processes consist of
knowledge capture, knowledge transfer, and knowledge application. A critical literature review is an important stage before conducting
More broadly, Probst, Romhardt, and Raub (2000) claimed that KM any research study (Al-Emran, Mezhuyev, & Kamaludin, 2018c). It es-
processes include: knowledge identification, knowledge capture, tablishes the groundwork for knowledge accumulation, which in turn
knowledge development, knowledge sharing, knowledge dissemina- enables the theories’ extensions and developments, closes the gaps ex-
tion, knowledge application, and knowledge storage. In addition, Soto- isting in research, and uncovers areas where previous research has
Acosta, Popa, and Palacios-Marqués (2017) and Tiwana (2000) pointed missed (Marangunić & Granić, 2015). A literature review can be viewed
out that KM processes include: knowledge acquisition/creation, as a systematic literature review only when the review is based on
knowledge sharing/dissemination, and knowledge utilization. Tiwana explicit research questions, determines and analyzes relevant research
(2000) specified that KM processes are working in a continuous cycle, studies, and evaluates their quality based on specified criteria (Khan,
in which, it enables the IS users to achieve their goals, add a new Kunz, Kleijnen, & Antes, 2003). In this review study, Kitchenham and
knowledge and share that knowledge accordingly. Charters’s guidelines (Kitchenham & Charters, 2007) for conducting a
From the technological viewpoints, Watjatrakul (2013) stated that systematic review were followed in addition to the procedures of other
existing knowledge of individuals about a particular technology en- systematic reviews that were carried out in the KM context (Costa &
hances their capabilities to comprehend the IS usage and features, Monteiro, 2016; Zahedi et al., 2016). In that, the review was conducted
identify the system difficulties, and to reinforce their attitudes toward in four distinct phases: the identification of inclusion and exclusion
the system usage. Moreover, it is indicated that KM processes are the criteria, data sources and search strategies, quality assessment, and data
essential elements for improving the capabilities of a particular tech- coding and analysis. The details of these phases are demonstrated in the
nology, and the successful implementation of such technology following sub-sections.

174
M. Al-Emran et al. International Journal of Information Management 43 (2018) 173–187

Table 1 participants, (f) database, and (g) country. Throughout the data ana-
Inclusion and exclusion criteria. lysis phase, the articles which didn’t clearly describe the KM processes
Inclusion Criteria Exclusion Criteria impact on ISs were excluded from the synthesis. The analysis of the
collected studies was carried out by the first author of this study by
Should involve knowledge Knowledge management processes or factors analyzing each article manually.
management processes or that are not used with information systems or
factors. technologies.
Should involve an information Knowledge management processes or factors
system or technology. that are used in contexts other than 4. Results
information systems or technologies.
Should be written in English. Articles that use languages other than English. With respect to the published 41 research studies about KM pro-
cesses influence on ISs from 2001 to 2018, the findings of this sys-
tematic review are reported based on the five research questions.
3.1. Inclusion/exclusion criteria

The articles that will be critically analyzed in this review study

4.1. RQ1: what are the main KM processes studied considering their
should meet the inclusion and exclusion criteria described in Table 1.
relationship with information systems?

3.2. Data sources and search strategies Several research studies were carried out to examine the effect of
KM processes on the adoption, acceptance, and implementation of ISs.
The research articles involved in this systematic review were col- In Table 4, the authors classify the KM processes across the analyzed
lected through an extensive search of existing studies via the sub- studied in order to determine what are the most frequent KM processes
sequent databases: Emerald, IEEE, ScienceDirect, Springer, Taylor & studied in the analyzed studies. We can notice that knowledge sharing
Francis, Wiley, ACM Digital Library, and Google Scholar. The search of is the most frequent KM process studied (N = 36), followed by
these studies was undertaken in May 2018. The search terms include knowledge acquisition and knowledge application (N = 13), IS
the keywords ((“knowledge management processes” OR “knowledge knowledge (N = 7), knowledge storage (N = 2), knowledge protection
management factors”) AND (“acceptance” OR “adoption” OR “in- and knowledge creation (N = 1), respectively in the analyzed studies.
formation systems”)). The selection of the keywords is an essential step With reference to Table 5, it seems that knowledge sharing was
in any systematic review as it determines which articles are to be re- positively affecting the adoption, acceptance, and implementation of E-
trieved (Costa & Monteiro, 2016). The search results retrieved 1165 business systems (Lee et al., 2007; Maditinos, Chatzoudes, &
articles using the above mentioned keywords. 97 articles were found as Sarigiannidis, 2014; Migdadi et al., 2016), Knowledge Management
duplicates, and thereby, they were filtered out. Hence, the overall Systems (El Said, 2015; Shrafat, 2017), IS outsourcing (Lee, 2001; Lee,
number of remaining articles becomes 1068. The authors confirmed the Huynh, & Hirschheim, 2008), Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
inclusion and exclusion criteria for each study. Accordingly, 41 re- systems (Maditinos, Chatzoudes, & Tsairidis, 2011; Shao, Feng, & Liu,
search articles were found to meet the inclusion criteria, and thereby, 2012), blogs (Hsu & Lin, 2008), wikis (Iglesias-Pradas, Hernández-
were included in the analysis process. The search and refinement stages García, & Fernández-Cardador, 2015), cloud-based Virtual Learning
in this review study were carried out according to the Preferred Re- Environment (VLE) (Hew & Kadir, 2016), E-Government services (Park,
porting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) Dulambazar, & Rho, 2013), cloud computing (Arpaci, 2017), social web
(Moher et al., 2009). Fig. 1 shows the PRISMA flowchart. (Soto-Acosta et al., 2017), Google applications (Cheung & Vogel, 2013),
social software (Kim, 2012), Software Process Improvement (Lee et al.,
3.3. Quality assessment 2016), Customer Relationship Management (CRM) (Garrido-Moreno,
Lockett, & García-Morales, 2014), social media (Aboelmaged, 2018;
One of the crucial factors that needs to be examined along with the Moghavvemi, Sharabati, Klobas, & Sulaiman, 2018), Enterprise
inclusion and exclusion criteria is the quality assessment (Al-Emran crowdsourcing systems (Vel, Park, & Liu, 2018), and Collaborative
et al., 2018c). A quality assessment checklist with 8 criteria was pre- Commerce (Chong et al., 2013). Furthermore, knowledge acquisition is
pared and used to afford a means for appraising the quality of the re- significantly influencing the adoption, acceptance, and implementation
search articles that were retained for further analysis (N = 41). The of E-business systems (Lee et al., 2007; Lin & Lee, 2005; Lin, 2013;
quality assessment checklist is illustrated in Table 2. The checklist was Migdadi et al., 2016; Yee-Loong Chong, Ooi, Bao, & Lin, 2014), IS
not intended to be a form of criticism of any scholars’ work outsourcing (Qian & Guo-Jie, 2015), CRM (Garrido-Moreno et al.,
(Kitchenham & Charters, 2007). The checklist was adapted from those 2014), teachers’ network community (Qin, Li, Zha, & He, 2017), and
suggested by (Kitchenham & Charters, 2007). Each question was scored Collaborative Commerce (Chong et al., 2013). In addition, knowledge
according to the three-point scale, with a “Yes” being worth 1 point, application is positively affecting the adoption, acceptance, and im-
“No” being worth 0 point, and “Partially” being worth 0.5 point. Hence, plementation of E-business systems (Lee et al., 2007; Lin & Lee, 2005;
each study could score between 0 and 8, with the higher the total score Migdadi et al., 2016; Yee-Loong Chong et al., 2014), CRM (Garrido-
a study attains, the higher the degree to which this study addresses the Moreno et al., 2014), and Collaborative Commerce (Chong et al., 2013).
research questions. Table 3 demonstrates the quality assessment results On the other side, it has been noticed that knowledge storage,
for all the 41 studies. In that, it is clear that all the studies have passed knowledge protection, and knowledge creation were less studied con-
the quality assessment, which in turn, reveals that all the studies are sidering their relationship with ISs. For instance, knowledge storage
qualified to be used for further analysis. was positively affecting the implementation of E-business systems (Lin,
2013) and the attitudes towards the acceptance of cloud computing
3.4. Data coding and analysis services (Arpaci, 2017). Additionally, knowledge protection was shown
to have a positive impact on E-business systems (Lin, 2013). Besides,
The characteristics correlated to the research methodology quality knowledge creation was positively affecting the acceptance of cloud
were coded including (a) the main KM processes, (b) research methods computing services (Arpaci, 2017). Therefore, further research should
(e.g., survey, interviews, experiment, etc.), (c) research outcomes (e.g., focus on investigating the impact of these KM processes on other types
positive, neutral, and negative), (d) types of information systems, (e) of ISs.

175
M. Al-Emran et al. International Journal of Information Management 43 (2018) 173–187

Fig. 1. PRISMA flowchart for the selected studies.

Table 2 4.2.2. Distribution of research outcomes

Quality assessment checklist. Fig. 3 reveals that 78% of the analyzed studies (N = 32) registered
# Question positive research outcomes, followed by 12% (N = 5) as neutral out-
comes. With regard to research methods, Fig. 4 indicates that 56% of
1 Are the research aims clearly specified? the analyzed studies (N = 23) that achieved positive outcomes mainly
2 Are the KM processes considered by the study clearly specified?
relied on questionnaire surveys as a method for data collection.
3 Is the IS/technology considered by the study clearly specified?
4 Are the data collection methods adequately detailed?
5 Does the study explain the reliability/validity of the measures? 4.3. RQ3: what types of information systems are mainly studied involving
6 Are the statistical techniques used to analyze the data adequately described? KM processes, and what are the types of participants in the collected studies?
7 Do the results add to the literature?
8 Does the study add to your knowledge or understanding?
4.3.1. Types of information systems
Fig. 5 shows the distribution of the analyzed studies with regard to
the types of information systems. We can observe that KM processes
4.2. RQ2: what are the main research methods and research outcomes studies considering ISs were mainly focused on investigating the impact
addressed in the collected studies? of KM processes on E-business systems implementation (N = 6). This is
followed by the studies that examined the effect of KM processes on
4.2.1. Distribution of research methods knowledge management systems (N = 4), IS outsourcing (N = 3), and
Fig. 2 indicates that 71% of the analyzed studies were mainly de- social media, ERP systems, and E-government services with 2 studies
pended on questionnaire surveys (N = 29) for data collection, this is each, respectively.
followed by both (interviews & surveys) (N = 10), respectively. This is
regarded as a new finding in the KM processes literature which involves 4.3.2. Types of participants
the impact of these processes on ISs. Fig. 6 shows the distribution of the analyzed studies in terms of

176
M. Al-Emran et al. International Journal of Information Management 43 (2018) 173–187

Table 3 published. In that, these studies are ranged from 2001 to 2018. The
Quality assessment results. number of published articles was increased from one study in 2001 to
Study Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Total Percentage an average of five studies in the past four years. Furthermore, there is a
remarkable increase of published articles in 2013 and 2017. It is
S1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 100% worthwhile that the number of published articles in 2018 is 3 and this
S2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 7.5 93.75%
could refer to the reason that the articles’ collection was undertaken in
S3 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 7 87.5%
S4 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 7 87.5%
May 2018 and there are other articles that still in progress and not yet
S5 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 7 87.5% published.
S6 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 7 87.5%
S7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 100% 4.5. RQ5: what are the active databases in the context of KM processes?
S8 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 6.5 81.25%
S9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 7.5 93.75%
S10 1 1 1 1 0.5 1 0.5 0.5 6.5 81.25% This section is dedicated to determine the most active databases that
S11 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 7 87.5% publish studies related to KM processes and their relationships with ISs.
S12 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 7 87.5% Fig. 10 shows the distribution of the collected studies in terms of da-
S13 1 1 1 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 4 50%
tabases. It is evident that ScienceDirect is considered the most pro-
S14 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 7 87.5%
S15 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 7.5 93.75%
ductive database among others with 15 published articles. This is fol-
S16 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 7 87.5% lowed by Emerald (N = 12), Google Scholar, IEEE, Springer, Taylor &
S17 1 1 1 1 0.5 1 0.5 0.5 6.5 81.25% Francis with 3 studies each, and ACM Digital Library and Sage with 1
S18 1 1 1 1 0 0 0.5 0.5 5 62.5% study each.
S19 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 7 87.5%
S20 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 7 87.5%
S21 1 1 1 1 0.5 1 0.5 0.5 6.5 81.25% 5. Discussion
S22 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 7 87.5%
S23 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 7.5 93.75% The integration of KM with ISs enables the institutions to access
S24 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 7 87.5% their information for better and effective decision-making (Kebede,
S25 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 7.5 93.75%
S26 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 7.5 93.75%
2010). KM processes play a key role in affecting the acceptance and
S27 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 7 87.5% implementation of various ISs. The main aim of this review study is to
S28 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 7 87.5% systematically review and synthesize the studies published on this topic
S29 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 7 87.5% in an attempt to enhance the understanding of the contextual aspects of
S30 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 7.5 93.75%
KM processes and their relationships with ISs acceptance and success.
S31 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 7.5 93.75%
S32 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 7.5 93.75% Table 4 shows the classification of KM processes across the analyzed
S33 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 100% studies. We can observe that knowledge sharing is the most frequent
S34 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 7.5 93.75% KM process studied, followed by knowledge acquisition and knowledge
S35 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 100% application, knowledge storage, knowledge protection and knowledge
S36 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 7 87.5%
S37 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 7 87.5%
creation, respectively. These results are almost similar to (Costa &
S38 1 1 1 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 4 50% Monteiro, 2016) who pointed out that knowledge sharing and knowl-
S39 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 7 87.5% edge acquisition are the most frequent KM processes studied con-
S40 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 6.5 81.25% sidering their relationship with innovation. Besides, Fig. 11 shows a
S41 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 7 87.5%
Mind Map of the KM processes and the IS affected by each process along
with the research methods used in each study. This technique was in-
spired by (Busalim & Hussin, 2016) who attempted to categorize the
participants’ types. We can observe that KM processes studies involving
social commerce studies into different themes.
ISs were primarily focused on IS executives/managers in terms of data
Based on Fig. 11, knowledge sharing was found to have a positive
collection (N = 15). This is followed by studies that focused on IT
effect on the adoption, acceptance, and implementation of E-business
employees (N = 8), students and mixed participants (i.e., studies that
systems, ERP systems, blogs, wikis, cloud-based VLE, E-Government
collected data from different types of participants) with 5 studies each,
services, cloud computing, Google applications, social software, ICT,
respectively. We can notice that 56% of the studies (N = 23) focused on
ECS, and Collaborative Commerce through the usage of surveys. In
IS executives/managers and IT employees in collecting their data.
addition, knowledge sharing was also found to have a positive impact
on the adoption, acceptance, and implementation of KMS, IS out-
4.4. RQ4: how are the KM processes studies considering information sourcing, CRM, social media, and web technologies through the usage
systems are distributed across the countries of implementation and the years of interviews and surveys. Moreover, knowledge acquisition was found
of publication? to have a significant influence on the adoption, acceptance, and im-
plementation of E-business systems, teachers’ network community, ICT,
4.4.1. Distribution of studies with regard to their country of implementation and Collaborative Commerce through the usage of surveys. Besides,
Fig. 7 describes the distribution of all the analyzed articles over the knowledge acquisition was also found to have a significant influence on
countries in which these research studies were carried out. It is obvious the adoption, acceptance, and implementation of IS outsourcing and
that the majority of these studies were undertaken in Taiwan, Malaysia, CRM through the usage of interviews and surveys. Furthermore,
and China with 6 studies each. This is followed by Spain and Korea with knowledge application was found to have a positive effect on the
4 studies each, and Greek with 2 studies, respectively among the other adoption, acceptance, and implementation of Collaborative Commerce,
countries. With regard to research outcomes, Fig. 8 indicates that most E-business systems, cloud computing, ICT, and ECS through the usage
of the analyzed studies (N = 6) that achieved positive outcomes were of surveys in addition to CRM through the usage of interviews and
carried out in China. This is followed by Taiwan, Spain, and Korea with surveys. Additionally, knowledge creation was found to have a positive
a similar number of studies (N = 4). effect on the adoption of cloud computing through the usage of surveys.
Besides, knowledge storage was found to have a positive impact on the
4.4.2. Distribution of studies with regard to their years of publication adoption of cloud computing and E-business systems through the usage
With respect to publication year, Fig. 9 describes the distribution of of surveys. Moreover, knowledge protection was found to have a po-
the analyzed articles over the years in which these articles were sitive effect on the adoption of E-business systems through the usage of

177
M. Al-Emran et al. International Journal of Information Management 43 (2018) 173–187

Table 4
Classification of KM processes across the analyzed studies.
Source Knowledge Knowledge Knowledge Knowledge Knowledge IS Knowledge Knowledge
Acquisition Sharing Application Protection Storage Creation

Lin and Lee (2005) × × × ×

Lee et al. (2007) × × × ×
Migdadi et al. (2016) × × ×
Maditinos et al. (2014) × × ×
Lin (2013) × × × ×
Yee-Loong Chong et al. (2014) × × ×
Tsai and Hung (2016) × ×
El Said (2015) ×
Assegaff et al. (2011) × ×
Lee (2001) ×
Qian and Guo-Jie (2015) × ×
Lee et al. (2008) ×
Maditinos et al. (2011) ×
Shao et al. (2012) ×
Hsu and Lin (2008) ×
Iglesias-Pradas et al. (2015) ×
Hew and Kadir (2016) ×
Koh and Kim (2004) ×
Cegarra-Navarro, Garcia-Perez, and ×
Moreno-Cegarra, (2014)
Park et al. (2013) ×
Arpaci (2017) × × × ×
Alotaibi, Crowder, and Wills, (2013) ×
Soto-Acosta et al. (2017) ×
Cheung and Vogel (2013) ×
Kim (2012) ×
Lee et al. (2016) ×
Garrido-Moreno et al. (2014) × × ×
Chong et al. (2013) × × ×
García-Sánchez, García-Morales, and × × ×
Bolívar-Ramos, (2017)
Rao, Guo, and Chen, (2015) ×
Du, Liu, Straub, and Knight, (2017) ×
Ming-ming, Tie-nan, and Xuan, × × ×
(2010)
Tamjidyamcholo, Bin Baba, Shuib, ×
and Rohani, (2014)
Ooi, Sim, Yew, and Lin, (2011) ×
Watjatrakul (2013) ×
Shrafat (2017) ×
Aboelmaged (2018) ×
Adam and Mahadi (2017) × × ×
Moghavvemi et al. (2018) ×
Vel et al. (2018) × ×
Qin et al. (2017) ×

surveys. Although KM processes like sharing, acquisition, and applica- outcomes mainly relied on questionnaire surveys as a method for data
tion were found to have a significant effect on various ISs, further re- collection. These findings point out that questionnaire surveys are
search should be carried out to consider other ISs that were missed from considered as powerful methods for data collection that could achieve
the extant literature. Additionally, it has been noticed that knowledge positive outcomes depending on the context, participants, and sample
storage, knowledge protection, and knowledge creation were still in instrument.
early stage by considering their relationship with ISs. Therefore, further With respect to the types of information systems, Fig. 5 shows that
research should focus on investigating the impact of these KM processes KM processes studies considering ISs were mainly focused on in-
on other types of ISs. vestigating the impact of KM processes on E-business systems im-
Fig. 2 indicates that 71% of the analyzed studies were primarily plementation, followed by knowledge management systems, IS out-
relied on questionnaire surveys for data collection, followed by both sourcing, and social media, ERP systems, and E-government services,
(interviews & surveys). This is a new finding in the KM processes studies respectively. These findings indicate that IS scholars focused on ex-
that involves the impact of these processes on ISs. Moreover, this result amining the impact of KM processes on adopting, accepting, and im-
could be referred to the reason that quantitative methods like surveys plementing E-business systems, knowledge management systems, IS
are considered as the suitable methods to identify the relationship outsourcing, social media, ERP systems, and E-government services
among the constructs in the conceptual model (Malhotra & Grover, rather than other types of ISs. Further research is required to investigate
1998), and to analyze the respondents’ perceptions effectively (Al- the impact of KM processes on other types of ISs. In terms of partici-
Emran, Mezhuyev, & Kamaludin, 2018a). In addition, Fig. 3 reveals that pants, Fig. 6 shows that 56% of the studies focused on IS executives/
78% of the analyzed studies registered positive research outcomes, managers and IT employees in collecting their data. This could refer to
followed by 12% as neutral outcomes. This is an indicator that KM the reason that those participants have the enough capability to eval-
processes play a significant role in affecting the adoption, acceptance, uate ISs in terms of their adoption, acceptance, and implementation. By
and implementation of ISs. With regard to research methods, Fig. 4 referring to Table 5, we can notice that studies that relied on those
indicates that 56% of the analyzed studies that achieved positive types of participants achieved either positive or neutral research

178
 Table 5
Analysis of KM processes studies related to various ISs.
Source Study Purpose and KM Processes Information System Methods Country Participants Database Findings
Type
M. Al-Emran et al.

Lin and Lee (2005) The impact of "knowledge acquisition", E-Business systems Survey Taiwan IS executives Emerald Results showed that knowledge level,
"knowledge application", "knowledge knowledge acquisition, and knowledge
sharing", and "knowledge level" on e-business application significantly affect the level of e-
systems adoption. business systems adoption. However,
knowledge sharing doesn’t support this
relationship.
Lee et al. (2007) The influence of "knowledge acquisition", Emerald Results indicated that knowledge acquisition,
"knowledge application", "knowledge knowledge application, knowledge sharing,
sharing", and "knowledge level" on the E- and knowledge level have a positive impact on
business implementation success. the e-business implementation success.
Migdadi et al. (2016) The effect of "knowledge acquisition", Saudi Arabia Emerald Results revealed that knowledge acquisition,
"knowledge application", and "knowledge knowledge application, and knowledge sharing
sharing" on e-business implementation. have a positive impact on e-business
implementation.
Maditinos et al. The influence of "knowledge accumulation", Greek Emerald Results showed that knowledge sharing
(2014) "knowledge application", and "knowledge positively affects the e-business
sharing" on e-business implementation. implementation. However, knowledge
accumulation and knowledge application don’t
support this relationship.
Lin (2013) The impact of "knowledge acquisition", Taiwan IS managers Emerald Results revealed that the three e-business
"knowledge storage", "knowledge diffusion stages are positively affected by
dissemination", and "knowledge protection" knowledge dissemination. Moreover,
on E-business initiation, E-business knowledge acquisition and knowledge
implementation, and E-business assimilation. protection positively affect the e-business

179
assimilation stage while it doesn’t have an
impact on the other two stages. Furthermore,
knowledge storage significantly influences the
e-business initiation and e-business
implementation while it doesn’t influence the
e-business assimilation.
Yee-Loong Chong The impact of "knowledge acquisition", E-Business systems Survey Malaysia Firms’ top management Emerald Results showed that knowledge acquisition and
et al. (2014) "knowledge dissemination", and "knowledge knowledge application were found to have a
application" on e-business supply chain significant effect on e-business supply chain
technology adoption. technology adoption. However, knowledge
dissemination doesn’t support this relationship.
Tsai and Hung (2016) The effect of "collaborative knowledge" and Knowledge Management Interviews + Survey Taiwan Chief officer of the IS department Taylor & Results indicated that KMS adoption is
"employees’ IS knowledge" on KMS adoption. System Francis significantly influenced by both collaborative
knowledge and employees’ IS knowledge.
El Said (2015) The influence of "knowledge sharing Not Specified Administration and technical staff ScienceDirect Results revealed that knowledge sharing
intention" on task-technology fit (TTF), intention positively affects the task-technology
utilization, and performance impact. fit (TTF), utilization, and performance impact.
Assegaff et al. (2011) The impact of "perceived benefit of Not Specified Not Specified IEEE Not Specified.
knowledge sharing" and "beliefs of
knowledge ownership" on the behavioral
intention to use.
Lee (2001) The effect of "knowledge sharing" on IS IS outsourcing Interviews + Survey Korea IS managers ScienceDirect Results revealed that knowledge sharing
outsourcing success. significantly affect the IS outsourcing success.
Qian and Guo-Jie The effect of "knowledge acquisition" and China Participating companies of the 5th IEEE Results indicated that both knowledge
(2015) "knowledge integration" on the project China International Service acquisition and knowledge integration have a
quality of IT outsourcing success. Outsourcing Cooperation positive impact on the project quality of IT
Conference + MBA participants outsourcing success.
Lee et al. (2008) The impact of "knowledge sharing" on the IT Korea Service receivers + Service Springer Results revealed that IT outsourcing success is
outsourcing success. providers positively affected by knowledge sharing.
(continued on next page)
International Journal of Information Management 43 (2018) 173–187
 Table 5 (continued)

Source Study Purpose and KM Processes Information System Methods Country Participants Database Findings
Type
M. Al-Emran et al.

Maditinos et al. The effect of "knowledge transfer" on the ERP ERP system Survey Greek IT managers Emerald Results indicated that ERP system
(2011) system implementation. implementation is positively affected by
knowledge transfer.
Shao et al. (2012) The influence of "ERP knowledge sharing" on China IS executives + ERP end users ScienceDirect Results revealed that ERP success is
ERP success. significantly influenced by ERP knowledge
sharing.
Hsu and Lin (2008) The influence of "knowledge sharing factors" Blog Taiwan Blog users ScienceDirect Results indicated that knowledge sharing
on the attitude towards utilizing blogs. factors positively affect the attitude towards
using blogs.
Iglesias-Pradas et al. The effect of the "attitude towards Wiki Spain IS Employees ScienceDirect Results showed that the attitude towards
(2015) collaborative knowledge sharing" on the collaborative knowledge sharing significantly
intention to use corporate wikis. affects the intention to use corporate wikis.
Hew and Kadir (2016) The influence of the "attitude toward Cloud-based Virtual Malaysia Primary and Secondary School ScienceDirect Results showed that the VLE behavioral
knowledge sharing" on the VLE behavioral Learning Environment Teachers intention is significantly affected by the
intention. (VLE) attitude toward knowledge sharing.
Koh and Kim (2004) The influence of "knowledge sharing activity" Virtual Communities Interviews + Survey Korea Members from 691 virtual ScienceDirect Results indicated that knowledge sharing
on the community participation and and e-business communities activity positively influences the community
community promotion. participation and community promotion.
Cegarra-Navarro et al. The effect of "technology knowledge" on E-government Services Survey Spain Citizens ScienceDirect Results revealed that citizen engagement is
(2014) citizen engagement. positively influenced by technology
knowledge.
Park et al. (2013) The effect of "knowledge sharing" on Mongolia Government Employees Sage Results indicated that knowledge sharing is a
performance. strong factor that affects the employees'
performance.
Arpaci (2017) The impact of "knowledge creation & Cloud Computing Turkey Undergraduate students ScienceDirect Results indicated that knowledge creation &

180
discovery", "knowledge storage", "knowledge discovery, knowledge storage, and knowledge
sharing", and "knowledge application" on sharing have a positive impact on perceived
perceived usefulness which in turn affect the usefulness which in turn affects the attitude
attitude toward cloud computing services. toward cloud computing services. However,
knowledge application doesn’t support this
relationship.
Alotaibi et al. (2013) The effect of the "attitude toward knowledge Web Technologies Interviews + Survey Not Specified Academics ACM Digital Not Specified.
share technology" on the behavioral intention Library
to share knowledge technology.
Soto-Acosta et al. The influence of "Social web knowledge Social web knowledge Interviews + Survey Spain CEOs Springer Results showed that Social web knowledge
(2017) sharing" on the innovation performance. sharing sharing significantly affects the innovation
performance.
Cheung and Vogel The impact of "knowledge sharing" on Google Applications Survey China University Students ScienceDirect Results indicated that knowledge sharing has a
(2013) perceived usefulness, attitude, behavioral positive effect on perceived usefulness,
intention, and system usage. attitude, behavioral intention, and system
usage.
Kim (2012) The impact of "knowledge sharing" on Social Software Korea Employees in government agencies Emerald Results indicated that knowledge sharing
perceived usefulness and perceived ease of positively affects the perceived usefulness and
use which are both, in turn, affect the perceived ease of use.
intention to use social software.
Lee et al. (2016) The influence of "Software Process Software Process Taiwan Managers and Practitioners ScienceDirect Results revealed that SPI success is significantly
Improvement (SPI) knowledge sharing" on Improvement affected by the SPI knowledge sharing.
the SPI success.
Garrido-Moreno et al. The influence of "knowledge management Customer Relationship Interviews + Survey Spain + UK General Managers ScienceDirect Results showed that CRM success is positively
(2014) processes (acquisition, sharing, and Management (CRM) influenced by KM processes (acquisition,
utilization)" on CRM success. sharing, and utilization).
(continued on next page)
International Journal of Information Management 43 (2018) 173–187
 Table 5 (continued)

Source Study Purpose and KM Processes Information System Methods Country Participants Database Findings
Type
M. Al-Emran et al.

Chong et al. (2013) The effect of "knowledge acquisition", Collaborative Survey Malaysia IT or logistics head of the company Taylor & Results indicated that C-commerce adoption is
"knowledge dissemination", and "knowledge Commerce Francis influenced by KM processes (acquisition,
application" on C-commerce adoption. dissemination, and application).
García-Sánchez et al. The impact of "knowledge acquisition", ICT Spain CEOs Springer Results revealed that knowledge acquisition,
(2017) "knowledge transfer", and "knowledge knowledge transfer, and knowledge utilization
utilization" on organizational performance. positively affects the organizational
Moreover, the effect of "knowledge performance. Moreover, knowledge acquisition
acquisition" on "knowledge transfer" and the positively affects knowledge transfer and
effect of "knowledge transfer" on "knowledge knowledge transfer significantly affects
utilization". knowledge utilization. Furthermore,
knowledge acquisition indirectly influences
knowledge utilization through knowledge
transfer.
Rao et al. (2015) The impact of "knowledge sharing" on firm IS maturity China Business Managers Emerald Results indicated that the firm performance is
performance. significantly affected by knowledge sharing.
Du et al. (2017) The influence of "knowledge sharing" on IT-enabled global Interviews + Survey PRC IT Employees Taylor & Results revealed that knowledge sharing
innovative behavior and exploitive learning. service Francis significantly influences the innovative behavior
and exploitive learning.
Ming-ming et al. The impact of "knowledge acquisition", Inter-organizational Survey China Customers of IT consulting IEEE Results showed that knowledge acquisition,
(2010) "knowledge sharing", and "knowledge information systems companies and software knowledge sharing, and knowledge utilization
utilization & integration" on inter- (IOS) vendors + MBA students & integration have a significant impact on
organizational information systems (IOS). inter-organizational information systems (IOS).
Tamjidyamcholo The impact of "knowledge sharing behavior" Information Security Not Specified Information Security Groups in ScienceDirect Results showed that knowledge sharing
et al. (2014) on information security risk reduction Professional Virtual LinkedIn positively affects the information security risk
expectation. Community (LinkedIn) reduction expectation.

181
Ooi et al. (2011) The impact of "perceived knowledge" on the Broadband Malaysia University students ScienceDirect Results showed that perceived knowledge
behavioral intention to adopt broadband. doesn’t affect the behavioral intention to adopt
broadband.
Watjatrakul (2013) The influence of "existing knowledge" on the Free voluntary service Not Specified Undergraduate and graduate Emerald Results revealed that existing knowledge
attitude towards using the technology. students positively affect the attitude towards using the
technology.
Shrafat (2017) The impact of “knowledge sharing” on KMS Knowledge Management Jordan IT managers Emerald Results indicated that knowledge sharing has a
adoption. System significant positive effect on KMS adoption.
Aboelmaged (2018) The impact of “internal knowledge sharing” Enterprise social United Arab of ESN users Emerald Results revealed that both internal and external
and “external knowledge sharing” on network (ESN) systems Emirates knowledge sharing have a significant positive
productivity. effect on productivity.
Adam and Mahadi The impact of “knowledge acquisition”, Internet Not Specified Malaysia Not Specified Google Not Specified.
(2017) “knowledge sharing”, and “knowledge Scholar
application” on organizational performance.
Moghavvemi et al. The effect of “knowledge sharing” on Facebook Survey Undergraduate students Google Results pointed out that knowledge sharing has
(2018) academic performance and recognition. Scholar a significant positive influence on both
academic performance and recognition.
Vel et al. (2018) The impact of “knowledge sharing” on Enterprise USA IT employees Google Results indicated that knowledge sharing has a
“knowledge application”. Moreover, the crowdsourcing systems Scholar significant positive effect on knowledge
effect of “knowledge application” on (ECS) application. Additionally, knowledge
satisfaction and innovative behavior. application is found to have a significant
positive effect on both satisfaction and
innovative behavior.
Qin et al. (2017) The influence of “knowledge acquisition” on Teachers’ network China Primary and middle school teachers ScienceDirect Results indicated that knowledge acquisition
perceived usefulness. community has a significant positive effect on perceived
usefulness of teachers’ network community.
International Journal of Information Management 43 (2018) 173–187
M. Al-Emran et al. International Journal of Information Management 43 (2018) 173–187

outcomes as those participants have enough experience in the re-

searched fields and could respond to the questionnaire surveys pre-
cisely. Based on the assumption that the institutions of higher education
are regarded as one of the main generators of knowledge (Howell &
Annansingh, 2013), it has been noticed that there is a less number of
research conducted considering these institutions. Hence, further re-
search should consider this gap and attempt to study the impact of KM
processes on the acceptance of the educational technologies used by
these institutions.
With respect to country, Fig. 7 clearly shows that the majority of KM
processes studies were carried out in Taiwan, Malaysia, and China,
followed by Spain, Korea, and Greek, respectively among the other
countries. With regard to research outcomes, Fig. 8 indicates that most
of the analyzed studies that achieved positive outcomes were under-
taken in China, followed by Taiwan, Spain, and Korea, respectively.
These findings could be attributed to the reason that scholars in these
countries are highly motivated to conduct research studies related to
KM processes involving ISs rather than other research fields. This could
Fig. 2. Distribution of studies by research methods.
probably elucidate the preponderance of KM processes studies con-
ducted in these countries as compared with the others.
With respect to publication year, Fig. 9 indicates that the number of
research articles was increased from one study in 2001 to an average of
five studies in the past four years. This increase may contribute to the
improvement of KM processes in studying the influence of these pro-
cesses on ISs. In addition, it has been observed that there is a remark-
able increase of published articles in 2013 and 2017. With respect to
Table 5, this increase could refer to the reason that the studied ISs (e.g.,
E-business systems, knowledge management systems, E-government
services, web technologies, cloud computing, Google applications, and
social web) in these years have received more attention from IS scholars
due to the popularity of these technologies, which was not the case in
the past years. On the contrary, (Charband & Navimipour, 2016) found
that knowledge sharing studies related to online environments were
highly published in 2012 and 2014. In addition, (Zahedi et al., 2016)
Fig. 3. Distribution of studies in terms of research outcomes.
revealed that knowledge sharing studies related to global software de-
velopment were highly increased since 2007 with a remarkable in-
crease in 2014.
With regard to database, Fig. 10 shows that ScienceDirect is con-
sidered the most productive database that stores numerous KM pro-
cesses research, followed by Emerald, Google Scholar, IEEE, Springer,
Taylor & Francis, respectively among the other databases. These data-
bases cover a sufficient amount of research on KM processes and its
relationship with a wide range of ISs. This result could benefit future
research, in which, KM scholars could refer to these databases for col-
lecting the KM articles.

6. Conclusion

Fig. 4. Distribution of studies by research outcomes and methods.

Previous KM processes review studies afforded a valuable insight
into the research trend of KM. Nevertheless, these review studies ne-
glected the analysis of KM processes with regard to their effect on ISs. In social web, Google applications, social software, software process im-
this study, we carried out a systematic literature review for KM pro- provement, CRM, social media, enterprise crowdsourcing systems, and
cesses studies related to ISs, attempting to provide a comprehensive Collaborative Commerce. Additionally, knowledge acquisition was
analysis of the existing studies and to discuss the implications of ana- significantly influencing the adoption, acceptance, and implementation
lysis results. The present review study revealed 8 new findings. First, of E-business systems, IS outsourcing, CRM, teachers’ network
knowledge sharing is the most frequent KM process studied, followed community, and collaborative commerce. Moreover, knowledge
by knowledge acquisition and knowledge application, respectively. application was positively affecting the adoption, acceptance, and im-
Second, knowledge sharing was found to positively affecting the plementation of E-business systems, CRM, and Collaborative
adoption, acceptance, and implementation of E-business systems, Commerce. Third, questionnaire surveys were found to be the primarily
Knowledge Management Systems, IS outsourcing, ERP systems, blogs, relied research methods for data collection in the context of KM pro-
wikis, cloud-based VLE, E-Government services, cloud computing, cesses. Fourth, 78% of the analyzed studies registered positive research

182
M. Al-Emran et al. International Journal of Information Management 43 (2018) 173–187

Fig. 5. Distribution of studies in terms of information systems types.

majority of the analyzed studies that registered positive outcomes were

undertaken in China, followed by Taiwan, Spain, and Korea. Eighth,
with regard to year of publication, KM processes studies related to ISs
have witnessed a remarkable increase of published articles in 2013 and
2017.
Although KM processes like knowledge sharing, knowledge acqui-
sition, and knowledge application were shown to have a significant
impact on various ISs, there is still an open door for further research to
investigate the impact of these processes on other types of ISs. In ad-
dition, it has been noticed that knowledge storage, knowledge protec-
tion, and knowledge creation were less studied considering their re-
lationship with ISs. Similarly, (Lee et al., 2007; Migdadi et al., 2016)
suggested investigating the influence of knowledge protection on the
success and implementation of E-business systems as research over-
looked the impact of this type of knowledge on the adoption and im-
plementation of ISs. To that end, further research should take this gap
into consideration and attempt to examine the impact of these KM
processes on different types of ISs. To conclude, the findings of this
Fig. 6. Distribution of studies in terms of participants. review study provide an insight into the current trend of KM processes
research involving ISs studies and form a valuable reference for future
outcomes, followed by 12% as neutral outcomes. Furthermore, 56% of studies in KM processes related to ISs.
the analyzed studies that achieved positive outcomes mainly relied on As a limitation, this systematic review was restricted to certain
questionnaire surveys as a method for data collection. Fifth, in terms of databases for collecting the research studies (i.e., Springer, ACM Digital
IS type, most of the analyzed studies focused on investigating the im- Library, Taylor & Francis, ScienceDirect, IEEE, Wiley, Emerald, and
pact of KM processes on E-business systems, knowledge management Google Scholar). In that, these databases may not provide a compre-
systems, IS outsourcing, respectively among the others. Sixth, in terms hensive representation of all articles published on KM processes and
of participants, most of the analyzed studies were primarily focused on their relationship with ISs. Further research could extend this study by
IS executives/managers in terms of data collection, followed by IT including studies from other databases such as: Web of Science, Scopus,
employees, respectively. Seventh, the majority of the analyzed studies Sage, among many others. In addition, future research could also focus
were carried out in Taiwan, Malaysia, and China, followed by Spain and on finding the type and benefit of influence between each KM process
Korea, respectively among the other countries. Furthermore, the and its corresponding IS.

183
M. Al-Emran et al. International Journal of Information Management 43 (2018) 173–187

Fig. 7. Distribution of studies by country of implementation.

Fig. 8. Distribution of studies by country of implementation and research outcomes.

Fig. 9. Distribution of studies by publication year.

184
M. Al-Emran et al. International Journal of Information Management 43 (2018) 173–187

Fig. 10. Distribution of studies in terms of database.

Fig. 11. Mind Map of KM processes, information systems, and methods.

Acknowledgement 382–390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.024.

Asrar-ul-Haq, M., & Anwar, S. (2016). A systematic review of knowledge management
and knowledge sharing: Trends, issues, and challenges. Cogent Business &
This work was made under the support of the Faculty of Computer Management, 3(1), https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2015.1127744.
Systems & Software Engineering at Universiti Malaysia Pahang. Assegaff, S., Hussin, A. R. C., & Dahlan, H. M. (2011). Perceived benefit of knowledge
sharing: Adapting TAM model. 2011 International Conference on Research and
Innovation in Information Systems, ICRIIS’11. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRIIS.2011.
References 6125744.
Blumenberg, S., Wagner, H. T., & Beimborn, D. (2009). Knowledge transfer processes in
Aboelmaged, M. G. (2018). Knowledge sharing through enterprise social network (ESN) IT outsourcing relationships and their impact on shared knowledge and outsourcing
systems: Motivational drivers and their impact on employees’ productivity. Journal of performance. International Journal of Information Management, 29(5), 342–352.
Knowledge Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-05-2017-0188 JKM-05-2017- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2008.11.004.
0188. Busalim, A. H., & Hussin, A. R. C. (2016). Understanding social commerce: A systematic
Adam, S., & Mahadi, B. (2017). The effectiveness of knowledge management towards literature review and directions for further research. International Journal of
organisational performance of internet business in Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Information Management, 36(6), 1075–1088. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.
Business and Economics, 3(1), 68–80. 2016.06.005.
Al-Emran, M., Mezhuyev, V., & Kamaludin, A. (2018a). PLS-SEM in information systems Cegarra-Navarro, J. G., Garcia-Perez, A., & Moreno-Cegarra, J. L. (2014). Technology
research: A comprehensive methodological reference. 4th international conference on ad- knowledge and governance: Empowering citizen engagement and participation.
vanced intelligent systems and informatics (AISI 2018). Springer In Press. Government Information Quarterly, 31(4), 660–668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.
Al-Emran, M., Mezhuyev, V., & Kamaludin, A. (2018b). Students’ perceptions towards the 2014.07.001.
integration of knowledge management processes in M-learning systems: A pre- Cerchione, R., & Esposito, E. (2017). Using knowledge management systems: A taxonomy
liminary study. International Journal of Engineering Education, 34(2), 371–380. of SME strategies. International Journal of Information Management, 37(1), 1551–1562.
Al-Emran, M., Mezhuyev, V., & Kamaludin, A. (2018c). Technology acceptance model in https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2016.10.007.
M-learning context: A systematic review. Computers & Education. Charband, Y., & Navimipour, N. J. (2016). Online knowledge sharing mechanisms: A
Alotaibi, H., Crowder, R., & Wills, G. (2013). Investigating factors for knowledge sharing systematic review of the state of the art literature and recommendations for future
using web technologies. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series. https://doi. research. Information Systems Frontiers, 18(6), 1131–1151.
org/10.1145/2494188.2494230. Cheung, R., & Vogel, D. (2013). Predicting user acceptance of collaborative technologies:
Arpaci, I. (2017). Antecedents and consequences of cloud computing adoption in edu- An extension of the technology acceptance model for e-learning. Computers and
cation to achieve knowledge management. Computers in Human Behavior, 70, Education, 63, 160–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.003.

185
M. Al-Emran et al. International Journal of Information Management 43 (2018) 173–187

Chong, A. Y. L., Chan, F. T. S., Goh, M., & Tiwari, M. K. (2013). Do interorganisational https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-11-2012-0233.
relationships and knowledge-management practices enhance collaborative commerce Lin, H. F., & Lee, G. G. (2005). Impact of organizational learning and knowledge man-
adoption? International Journal of Production Research, 51(7), 2006–2018. https://doi. agement factors on e-business adoption. Management Decision, 43(2), 171–188.
org/10.1080/00207543.2012.701776. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740510581902.
Colomo-Palacios, R., Fernandes, E., Soto-Acosta, P., & Larrucea, X. (2018). A case analysis Maditinos, D., Chatzoudes, D., & Sarigiannidis, L. (2014). Factors affecting e-business
of enabling continuous software deployment through knowledge management. successful implementation. International Journal of Commerce and Management, 24(4),
International Journal of Information Management, 40, 186–189. https://doi.org/10. 300–320. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCoMA-07-2012-0043.
1016/j.ijinfomgt.2017.11.005. Maditinos, D., Chatzoudes, D., & Tsairidis, C. (2011). Factors affecting ERP system im-
Costa, V., & Monteiro, S. (2016). Key knowledge management processes for innovation: A plementation effectiveness. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 25(1),
systematic literature review. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management 60–78. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410391211192161.
Systems. https://doi.org/10.1108/VJIKMS-02-2015-0017. Malhotra, M. K., & Grover, V. (1998). An assessment of survey research in POM: From
DeLong, D. (1997). Building the knowledge-based organization: How culture drives knowledge constructs to theory. Journal of Operations Management, 16(4), 407–425. https://doi.
behaviors. Centers for business innovation–Working paper1–29. May, Retrieved from org/10.1016/S0272-6963(98)00021-7.
http://www.providersedge.com/docs/km_articles/Building_the_Knowledge-Based_ Marangunić, N., & Granić, A. (2015). Technology acceptance model: A literature review
Organization.pdf. from 1986 to 2013. Universal Access in the Information Society, 14(1), 81–95. https://
Du, R., Liu, L., Straub, D. W., & Knight, M. B. (2017). The impact of espoused national doi.org/10.1007/s10209-014-0348-1.
cultural values on innovative behaviour: An empirical study in the Chinese IT-en- McAdam, R., & McCreedy, S. (1999). A critical review of knowledge management models.
abled global service industry. Asia Pacific Business Review, 23(3), 354–372. https:// The Learning Organization, 6(3), 91–101. https://doi.org/10.1108/
doi.org/10.1080/13602381.2016.1156907. 09696479910270416.
Edvardsson, I. R., & Durst, S. (2014). Outsourcing of knowledge processes: A literature Meese, N., & McMahon, C. (2012). Knowledge sharing for sustainable development in
review. Journal of Knowledge Management, 18(4), 795–811. https://doi.org/10.1108/ civil engineering: A systematic review. AI & Society, 27(4), 437–449. https://doi.org/
JKM-01-2014-0033. 10.1007/s00146-011-0369-8.
El Said, G. R. (2015). Understanding Knowledge Management System antecedents of Migdadi, M. M., Abu Zaid, M. K. S., Al-Hujran, O. S., & Aloudat, A. M. (2016). An em-
performance impact: Extending the Task-technology Fit Model with intention to pirical assessment of the antecedents of electronic-business implementation and the
share knowledge construct. Future Business Journal, 1(1), 75–87. https://doi.org/10. resulting organizational performance. Internet Research, 26(3), 661–688. https://doi.
1016/j.fbj.2015.11.003. org/10.1108/IntR-08-2014-0203.
García-Sánchez, E., García-Morales, V. J., & Bolívar-Ramos, M. T. (2017). The influence of Ming-ming, H. M. H., Tie-nan, W. T. W., & Xuan, X. X. X. (2010). Knowledge application
top management support for ICTs on organisational performance through knowledge process and assimilation of inter-organizational information systems: An empirical
acquisition, transfer, and utilisation. Review of Managerial Science, 11(1), 19–51. study. Management Science and Engineering (ICMSE), 2010 International Conference On,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-015-0179-3. (2001), 916–922. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICMSE.2010.5719908.
Garrido-Moreno, A., Lockett, N., & García-Morales, V. (2014). Paving the way for CRM Mitchell, H. J. (2003). Technology and knowledge management: Is technology just an enabler
success: The mediating role of knowledge management and organizational commit- or does it also add value? Knowledge management: Current issues and challenges. IGI
ment. Information and Management, 51(8), 1031–1042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im. Global66–78.
2014.06.006. Moghavvemi, S., Sharabati, M., Klobas, J. E., & Sulaiman, A. (2018). Effect of trust and
Hew, T. S., & Kadir, S. L. S. A. (2016). Predicting the acceptance of cloud-based virtual perceived reciprocal benefit on students’ knowledge sharing via Facebook and aca-
learning environment: The roles of Self Determination and Channel Expansion demic performance. The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 16(1), 23–35.
Theory. Telematics and Informatics, 33(4), 990–1013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., Altman, D., Antes, G., ... Tugwell, P.
2016.01.004. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The
Howell, K. E., & Annansingh, F. (2013). Knowledge generation and sharing in UK uni- PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.
versities: A tale of two cultures? International Journal of Information Management, Ooi, K. B., Sim, J. J., Yew, K. T., & Lin, B. (2011). Exploring factors influencing con-
33(1), 32–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2012.05.003. sumers’ behavioral intention to adopt broadband in Malaysia. Computers in Human
Hsu, C.-L. L., & Lin, J. C.-C. C. (2008). Acceptance of blog usage: The roles of technology Behavior, 27(3), 1168–1178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.12.011.
acceptance, social influence and knowledge sharing motivation. Information and Park, M. J., Dulambazar, T., & Rho, J. J. (2013). The effect of organizational social factors
Management, 45(1), 65–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2007.11.001. on employee performance and the mediating role of knowledge sharing: Focus on e-
Hwang, Y., Lin, H., & Shin, D. (2018). Knowledge system commitment and knowledge government utilization in Mongolia. Information Development, 31(1), 53–68. https://
sharing intention: The role of personal information management motivation. doi.org/10.1177/0266666913494908.
International Journal of Information Management, 39, 220–227. https://doi.org/10. Probst, G., Romhardt, K., & Raub, S. (2000). Managing knowledge: Building blocks for
1016/j.ijinfomgt.2017.12.009. success. Wiley.
Iglesias-Pradas, S., Hernández-García, Á., & Fernández-Cardador, P. (2015). Social fac- Qian, J., & Guo-Jie, H. (2015). The impact of knowledge acquisition and knowledge in-
tors’ influences on corporate wiki acceptance and use. Journal of Business Research, tegration of IT outsourcing supplier on outsourcing success-knowledge Sticky’s
68(7), 1481–1487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.038. moderating effect. Proceedings of International Conference on Service Science, ICSS,
Jasimuddin, S. M. (2006). Disciplinary roots of knowledge management: A theoretical IEEE, 57–62. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSS.2015.9.
review. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1108/ Qin, L., Li, N., Zha, S., & He, W. (2017). Research on factors influencing perceived use-
10553180610742782. fulness of a virtual teacher community: A case study of rural teachers in Inner
Kebede, G. (2010). Knowledge management: An information science perspective. Mongolia, China. Telematics and Informatics, 34(5), 463–471. https://doi.org/10.
International Journal of Information Management, 30(5), 416–424. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.tele.2016.09.008.
1016/j.ijinfomgt.2010.02.004. Rahimi, F., Møller, C., & Hvam, L. (2016). Business process management and IT man-
Khan, K. S., Kunz, R., Kleijnen, J., & Antes, G. (2003). Five steps to conducting a sys- agement: The missing integration. International Journal of Information Management,
tematic review. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1258/ 36(1), 142–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.10.004.
jrsm.96.3.118. Rao, Y., Guo, K. H., & Chen, Y. (2015). Information systems maturity, knowledge sharing,
Kim, S. (2012). Factors affecting the use of social software: TAM perspectives. The and firm performance. International Journal of Accounting and Information
Electronic Library, 30(5), 690–706. https://doi.org/10.1108/02640471211275729. Management, 23(2), 106–127. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-09-2015-0216.
Kitchenham, B., & Charters, S. (2007). Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews Shao, Z., Feng, Y., & Liu, L. (2012). The mediating effect of organizational culture and
in software engineering. Software Engineering Group, School of Computer Science and knowledge sharing on transformational leadership and Enterprise Resource Planning
Mathematics, Keele University1–57. https://doi.org/10.1145/1134285.1134500. systems success: An empirical study in China. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(6),
Koh, J., & Kim, Y. G. (2004). Knowledge sharing in virtual communities: An e-business 2400–2413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.07.011.
perspective. Expert Systems With Applications, 26(2), 155–166. https://doi.org/10. Shrafat, F. D. (2017). Examining the factors influencing knowledge management system
1016/S0957-4174(03)00116-7. (KMS) adoption in small and medium enterprises SMEs. Business Process Management
Kwon, T. H., & Zmud, R. W. (1987). Unifying the fragmented models of information systems Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-10-2016-0221.
implementation. Critical issues in information systems research227–251. Retrieved from Soto-Acosta, P., Popa, S., & Palacios-Marqués, D. (2017). Social web knowledge sharing
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=54905.54915. and innovation performance in knowledge-intensive manufacturing SMEs. The
Lee, J. N. (2001). The impact of knowledge sharing, organizational capability and part- Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(2), 425–440. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-
nership quality on IS outsourcing success. Information and Management, 38(5), 016-9498-z.
323–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(00)00074-4. Spender, J. C. (1996). Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic of the firm. Strategic
Lee, C., Lee, G., & Lin, H. (2007). The role of organizational capabilities in successful Management Journal, 17(May), 45–62.
e‐business implementation. Business Process Management Journal, 13(5), 677–693. Tamjidyamcholo, A., Bin Baba, M. S., Shuib, N. L. M., & Rohani, V. A. (2014). Evaluation
https://doi.org/10.1108/14637150710823156. model for knowledge sharing in information security professional virtual community.
Lee, J.-C., Shiue, Y.-C., & Chen, C.-Y. (2016). Examining the impacts of organizational Computers & Security, 43(2012), 19–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2014.02.010.
culture and top management support of knowledge sharing on the success of software Tiwana, A. (2000). The knowledge management toolkit: Practical techniques for building a
process improvement. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 462–474. https://doi.org/ knowledge management system. Retrieved fromPrentice Hall PTRhttps://dl.acm.org/
10.1016/j.chb.2015.08.030. citation.cfm?id=323909.
Lee, J. N., Huynh, M. Q., & Hirschheim, R. (2008). An integrative model of trust on IT Tsai, J. C.-A., & Hung, S.-Y. (2016). Determinants of knowledge management system
outsourcing: Examining a bilateral perspective. Information Systems Frontiers, 10(2), adoption in health care. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce,
145–163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-008-9066-7. 26(3), 244–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/10919392.2016.1194062.
Lin, H. F. (2013). The effects of knowledge management capabilities and partnership Turban, E., Sharda, R., & Delen, D. (2011). Decision support and business intelligence
attributes on the stage-based e-business diffusion. Internet Research, 23(4), 439–464. systems. IBM Systems Journal, 8th. Retrieved from http://portal.acm.org/citation.

186
M. Al-Emran et al. International Journal of Information Management 43 (2018) 173–187

cfm?id=1840968. Journal of Knowledge Management, 18(1), 121–136. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-08-

Vel, V., Park, I., & Liu, J. (2018). The effect of Enterprise crowdsourcing systems on em- 2013-0323.
ployees’ innovative behavior and job performance. Proceedings of the 51st Hawaii Yiu, M., & Law, R. (2014). Review and application of knowledge management and
International Conference on System Sciences175–184. knowledge sharing in tourism. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 19(7),
Watjatrakul, B. (2013). Intention to use a free voluntary service. Journal of Systems and 737–759. https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2013.812128.
Information Technology, 15(2), 202–220. https://doi.org/10.1108/ Zahedi, M., Shahin, M., & Babar, M. A. (2016). A systematic review of knowledge sharing
13287261311328903. challenges and practices in global software development. International Journal of
Yee-Loong Chong, A., Ooi, K.-B., Bao, H., & Lin, B. (2014). Can e-business adoption be Information Management, 36(6), 995–1019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.
influenced by knowledge management? An empirical analysis of Malaysian SMEs. 2016.06.007.

187