Skip to main content
Log in

Concept maps: a technique for assessing knowledge manager learning needs

  • Article
  • Published:
Knowledge Management Research & Practice

Abstract

This paper discusses an exploratory investigation of the role of concept mapping techniques for assessing knowledge manager learning needs and developing knowledge management (KM) training programs and courses. The research data were collected using seven concept map templates completed by 13 KM students during a 15-week higher education course. The study found that concept maps can provide a useful real-time feedback mechanism for knowledge managers undergoing structured learning, while enabling instructors to determine what KM practitioners require from their training and education. Additionally, the research showed that knowledge managers require a balance of foundational KM principles, concepts and methods coupled with examples of real-world implementations, tools and measures. The results also identify concept maps as a valuable research and evaluation technique for individuals engaged in the practice and process of training knowledge managers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alavi M and Leidner DE (1999) Knowledge management systems: issues, challenges and benefits. Communications of the AIS 1 (7), 1–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alavi M and Leidner DE (2001) Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: conceptual foundation and an agenda for research. MIS Quarterly 25 (1), 107–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alavi M, Kayworth TR and Leidner DE (2006) An empirical examination of the influence of organizational culture on knowledge management practices. Journal of Management Information Systems 22 (3), 191–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allan J (1996) Learning outcomes in higher education. Studies in Higher Education 21 (1), 93–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakri DA (2006) Learning-outcomes approaches to curriculum design and review. Synergy (Institute for Teaching and Learning, University of Sydney) 23, 21–24 . [WWW document] http://www.itl.usyd.edu.au/synergy/article.cfm?articleID=278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhatt GD (2000) A resource-based perspective of developing organizational capabilities for business transformation. Knowledge and Process Management 4 (10), 15–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhatt GD (2001) Knowledge management in organizations: examining the interaction between technologies, techniques, and people. Journal of Knowledge Management 5 (1), 68–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bickman L (1986) Using Program Theory in Evaluation. New Directions for Program Evaluation. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broadbent M (1997) The emerging phenomenon of knowledge management. Australian Library Journal 46 (1), 6–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen WM and Levinthal DA (1990) Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 35 (1), 128–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davenport TH, De Long DW and Beers MC (1998) Successful knowledge management projects. Sloan Management Review 39 (2), 43–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davenport TH, Jarvenpaa SL and Beers MC (1996) Improving knowledge work processes. Sloan Management Review 37 (4), 53–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Debowski S (2006) Knowledge Management. Wiley & Sons, Singapore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denzin NK and Lincoln YS (2005) The Handbook of Qualitative Research, 3rd edn, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond RM (1998) Designing and Assessing Courses and Curricula. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Earl MJ (1993) Experiences in strategic information systems planning. MIS Quarterly 17 (1), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edmondson KM (1995) Concept mapping for the development of medical curricula. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 32 (7), 777–793.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Einhorn HJ and Hogarth RM (1986) Judging probable cause. Psychological Bulletin 99 (1), 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallivan MJ and Keil M (2003) The user-developer communication process: a critical case study. Information Systems Journal 13 (1), 37–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gold AH, Malhotra A and Segars AH (2001) Knowledge management: an organizational capabilities perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems 18 (1), 185–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haas MR and Hansen MT (2005) When using knowledge can hurt performance: the value of organizational capabilities in a management consulting company. Strategic Management Journal 26 (1), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen MT and Haas MR (2001) Competing for attention in knowledge markets: electronic document dissemination in a management consulting company. Administrative Science Quarterly 46 (1), 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen MT and Von Oetinger B (2001) Introducing T-shaped managers. Knowledge management's next generation. Harvard Business Review 79 (3), 106–116, 165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen MT, Nohria N and Tierney T (1999) What's your strategy for managing knowledge? Harvard Business Review 77 (2), 106–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harpaz I, Balik C and Ehrenfeld M (2004) Concept mapping: an educational strategy for advancing nursing education. Nursing Forum 39 (2), 27–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holliday AR (2007) Doing and Writing Qualitative Research, 2nd edn, Sage, London, England.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kern DE, Thomas PA, Howard DM and Bass EB (1998) Curriculum Development for Medical Education, The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mark MM (1986) Validity typologies and the logic and practice of quasi-experimentation. In Advances in Quasi-experimental Design and Analysis. New Directions in Program Evaluation (TROCHIM WMK, Ed), 47–66. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel E, Roth B and Miller M (2005) Concept mapping as a tool for curriculum design. In Proceedings from the Informing Science and Information Technology Education Joint Conference (COHEN E, and BOYD E, Eds), pp. 505–513, Informing Science Institute Publishers, Flagstaff, Arizona, USA 16–19 July 2005. [WWW document] http://proceedings.informingscience.org/InSITE2005/I42f49McDa.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen AP (2006) Understanding dynamic capabilities through knowledge management. Journal of Knowledge Management 10 (4), 59–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Novak JD (1990) Concept maps and Vee diagrams: two metacognitive tools for science and mathematics education. Instructional Science 19 (1), 29–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Novak JD and Gowin DB (1984) Learning How to Learn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pant S and Ravichandran T (2001) A framework for information systems planning for e-business. Logistics Information Management 14 (1), 85–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton MQ (2002) Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, 3rd edn, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rico GL (1983) Writing the Natural Way: Using Right-brain Techniques to Release Your Expressive Powers. J.P. Tarcher, Los Angeles, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schultze U and Leidner DE (2002) Studying knowledge management in information systems research: discourses and theoretical assumptions. MIS Quarterly 26 (3), 213–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith CV, Herbert D, Robinson W and Watt K (2001) Quality assurance through a continuous curriculum review (CCR) strategy: reflections on a pilot project. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 26 (5), 489–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trochim WMK (1985) Pattern matching, validity, and conceptualization in program evaluation. Evaluation Review 9 (5), 575–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trochim WMK (2002) An introduction to concept mapping for planning and evaluation. Web Centre for Social Research Methods. [WWW document] http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/research/epp1/epp1.htm.

  • Trochim WMK and Linton R (1986) Conceptualization for evaluation and planning. Evaluation and Program Planning 9 (4), 289–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the 13 knowledge manager course participants for their assistance in undertaking this research, and the paper's reviewers who provided important and constructively critical comments during the development of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nigel Martin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Martin, N., Rice, J. Concept maps: a technique for assessing knowledge manager learning needs. Knowl Manage Res Pract 7, 152–161 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2009.8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2009.8

Keywords

Navigation