The conceptual evolution of Knowledge Management (KM) has been supported by the use of flexible processes and several computational tools. The sophistication of these tools, incorporating the KM concepts, has been growing with time, creating functions better suited to knowledge creation processes. However, centralized Knowledge Management Systems (KMS) present some inconveniences, such as inflexible knowledge codification structures and centralised control. These may diminish the flexibility and the availability of knowledge through processes that standardize knowledge and information and remove them from the context. The suggestion of peer‑to‑peer (P2P) systems seems to promise to overcome these inconveniences by supporting interaction and knowledge sharing in simultaneous different contexts. The P2P systems provide real benefits to the interchange of knowledge among its peerscollaborators, but they are far from being a guarantee of interaction. We argue that the notion of ba is the design basis to obtain P2P systems closer to theoretical KM concepts. Peers can be encouraged to freely share knowledge without the constraints imposed by hierarchies or other organisational limitations. Interaction through P2P systems, supported by the ba concept, can make better use of autonomy to access and share personal knowledge without a centralized codification. P2P systems consubstantiate the ba concept thereby creating a new entity which we call "connecting ba". We believe that the "connecting ba" can give different visions and energy to the utilization of P2P systems. "Connecting ba" can also provide stimulation for virtual participation and for knowledge creation processes. Probably the most important implication of "connecting ba" is the possibility to incorporate peers within the spirit of ba, promoting collaboration for knowledge creation. The characteristics and the concept relations of these notions are enumerated and justified throughout the text. 

This paper considers knowledge management functions as carried out by distributed virtual teams involved in the compilation of information‑based products using dedicated and domain‑specific computer‑ mediated practices and tools. We are concerned with two primary tasks, namely depositing shared assets and assembling information‑based artefacts by appropriating the benefits of virtual networking. Moreover, these tasks are considered from the perspective of the Social Experience Factory (SEF) — a platform enabling rich collaborative interactions between geographically dispersed members of communities of practice. The SEF incorporates domain‑specific workflows and several model‑based tools to facilitate systematic accumulation and reuse of collaborative artefacts. An account of these is provided by discussing current implementation in the context of a pilot application. 

This study demonstrates that resource‑based view (RBV) misidentifies the locus of dynamic knowledge articulation and long‑term dynamic competitive capabilities, and focuses on the distinctive role of drivers of dynamic learning mechanism in the evolution of dynamic knowledge articulation and dynamic competitiveness. Five drivers of dynamic learning mechanism such as the integration power of managers, external linkages, previous experience, repeated practice, and codification of experience play important roles on developing dynamic knowledge articulation, and ambiguity is a negative driver impact on developing dynamic knowledge articulation. Dynamic knowledge articulation is a positive impact on dynamic competitiveness in alliance organizations. The purpose of this paper is to contribute to a more complete understanding on developing dynamic knowledge articulation via the dynamic learning mechanism. The paper defines a clear theoretical model for the tautological animadversion of past research on RBV that can be complemented. 

Knowledge is seen as a driver for the definition and development of an organizational strategy and a key determinant of sustainable organizational competitiveness. The shift to knowledge as the primary source of value means that knowledge plays a key role in the organizational effectiveness. This paper highlights the importance of developing and managing the intangible assets and intellectual capital of organizations to create distinctive and sustainable value. It sets forth the concept of Knowledge Circles to enhance activities along the Knowledge Value Chain. Some of the factors that will impact knowledge management initiatives in Pakistani organizations have also been identified. 

In today's changing economy managers of the leading companies understand that the key sources for value creation are Intangible Assets (IA). The latest surveys confirm the fact that nowadays these assets are the value drivers and not "traditional" assets having tangible form. The same surveys confirm the fact, that one third of all the effected investment solutions is based on the existing Intangible Assets, and that the decisions made on the basis of IA allow them to make a more accurate prediction of income and profitability of a company in the future, and, hence, the company's value for the shareholders. The research held in the paper defines the impact of fundamental value of both tangible and intangible assets on the market value of assets of Russian companies. As a general approach used herein for IA evaluation, the method of Calculated Intangible Value (CIV) offered by T. Stewart was chosen. According to CIV the evaluation of Intangible Assets is based on residual operating income (REOI) model as a variant fundamental value of equity model. The problem of Intangible Assets composition and structure is also covered in the paper. Developed econometric models are tested on the data of Russian stock market for two periods: from 2001 to 2005 year and from 2001 to 2006. In the focus of the research there is both the analysis of the sampled companies (43 companies) as a whole as well as divided into five aggregated fields: mechanical engineering, extractive industry, power engineering, communication services, and metallurgy. At the end of the paper the authors highlight the main directions for further research in the field. 

This paper hopes to persuade readers of current thinking around Knowledge Management that more emphasis should be placed on tacit knowledge in management and its education and how it might be better communicated to students within universities and in organisations in general. It reflects upon what appears to be the predominant attention being paid to explicit knowledge in the curriculum and pedagogy of UK Universities which offer courses entitled Knowledge Management, and that this may be at the expense of more tacit knowledge 'management' approaches.