Many knowledge management (KM) projects have been initiated, some of which have been successes but many have been failures. Measuring the success or failure of KM initiatives is not easy, and in order to do so some kind of measurement process has to be available. There are three points at which evaluation of KM projects can, and should be, done: (1) when deciding whether to start and where to focus, (2) once under way, following up on a project and making adjustments if needed, and (3) when completed, to evaluate the project outcomes. This paper concentrates on the first two areas by developing a general instrument for evaluation of KM projects.

This paper draws from the experience of undertaking what has been termed 'knowledge management' work, and outlines the approach being taken, which has focused on the conceptual design of human processes. This paper presents a way of thinking about knowledge management as a set of processes involving (for example) (i) the human process to which human knowledge is applied (e.g. an 'operation' of some sort), (ii) the human process in which knowledge is encouraged to be developed (e.g. a course of study, application of techniques, thinking, reflection etc), (iii) a process of reviewing a the experience in problematic situation in order that learning can be derived (e.g. an 'after action review'), (iv) the integration of all the above processes which is in some way 'managed' and 'co‑ordinated' through the process of undertaking work as a 'knowledge manager'. The approach being taken assumes that it is the processes that are being managed, rather than the knowledge per se. The paper outlines the approach taken which draws upon the experiences, difficulties and anxieties of taking responsibility for a knowledge management initiative associated with the EU funded MEDFORIST project.

The main objective of this paper is to investigate and identify the main determinants of successful knowledge management (KM) programs. We draw upon the institutional theory and the theory of technology assimilation to develop an integrative model of KM success that clarifies the role of information technology (IT) in relation to other important KM infrastructural capabilities and to KM process capabilities. We argue that the role of IT cannot be studied in isolation and that the effect of IT on KM success is fully mediated by KM process capabilities. The research model is tested with a survey study involving 191 KM practitioners. The empirical results provided strong support for the model. In addition to its theoretical contributions, this study also presents important practical implications through the identification of specific infrastructural capabilities leading to KM success.

Business Process Redesign (BPR) helps rethinking a process in order to enhance its performance. Practitioners have been developing methodologies to support BPR implementation. However, most methodologies lack actual guidance on deriving a process design threatening the success of BPR. In this paper, we suggest the use of a case‑based reasoning technique (CBR) to support solving new problems by adapting previously successful solutions to similar problems to support redesigning new business processes by adapting previously successful redesign to similar business process. An implementation framework for BPR and the CBR's cyclical process are used as a knowledge management technical support to serve for the effective reuses of redesign methods as a knowledge creation and sharing mechanism.

Business Process Redesign (BPR) is undertaken to achieve order‑of‑magnitude improvements over 'old' form of the organisation. Practitioners in the academia and business world have developed a number of methodologies to support this competitive restructuring that forms the current focus of concern, many of which have not been successful. This paper suggests the use of Data Mining (DM) as a technique to support the process of redesigning a business by extracting the much‑needed knowledge hidden in large volumes of data maintained by the organization through the DM models.

This research focuses on analysing knowledge processes of the design process, especially the early phases of the design process that can be called concept design. It aims at developing a body of knowledge that builds on the relevant issues toward user‑centred design in a form of a framework. This is intended to apply, organise and synthesise processes, theories and concepts from the separate but linked disciplines of knowledge management and human‑ computer interaction, hence addressing one of the most essential topics and goals of system design, i.e. how to define what is needed in the system and how the system should mediate human activities„for the purposes of this research, in the context of interest‑based communities and mobile technology. The framework is based on the following propositions: (1) The participants of design process include designers and users as actors, both of which are seen to possess knowledge needed toward successful design; (2) this knowledge is proposed to be context‑specific, hence being specific for certain users using certain technology; (3) for the user as well as for the design professional there are some things that are known but have not been articulated; and (4) the knowledge processes transforming tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge by users and designers are linked and need to be combined, finally (5) toward knowledge embedded into concepts, products, or services. Overall, the research highlights how knowledge processes enable user involvement and capturing tacit (and novel) user knowledge toward successful concept designdesign.

In this paper evidence that sustain the importance of partaking in promoting knowledge creation and sharing, is gathered from a recent study of optimisation of a corrugated cardboard machine. The investigating method is action research combined with the theoretical views of the SCOT approach (Pinch and Bijker, 1989; Latour, 1987; Law, 1992). It is revealed how inclusion of workers in discussion concerning their workplace, promotes an ownership to their work. This was accomplished by creating a trusting environment allowing workers to speak open and freely (Webb et. al, 2002). Hence knowledge creation and sharing concentrates on those who need the knowledge which is developed. In reality what happened in this project was a redistribution of power and influence (Lukes, 1974).

Suitable definitions of knowledge for particular organisational contexts are valuable for knowledge management (KM). This paper explains why it is valuable, how it can be done and discusses valuable results that have been created by doing it. The why is explained in a brief discussion of relevant literature. The how is described through the use of MaKE First Steps (2006a). This paper summarises the process and this constitutes the methodology of the paper. The paper then describes three diverse organisational contexts in which it has been applied: a UK Fast Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG) company; a group of international postgraduate business students; and a large Chinese bank. The outputs of this work (definitions of knowledge for these organisational contexts) are presented and discussed in detail. There are significant patterns that can be discerned which give some clear suggestions about what knowledge is valuable for organisations and should be the focus of managers investment and time. This research gives us an insight into what organisations should focus on in terms of investment of energy, time and resources. Broadly, without being too proscriptive, they should focus on the skills and learning of the personnel that make the organisation they work for, special.