A number of organisations have recognised the importance of managing their organisation knowledge in a more structured manner. However, the question arises as to how to evaluate the benefits of a Knowledge Management (KM) strategy and its associated initiatives on the performance of the organisation. This paper presents a framework for the assessment of the likely impact of KM and discusses findings from an evaluation workshop held to critique the framework.

Valtech is a Paris‑based consulting firm established in 1993 and devoted to e‑business technologies. The company was initially structured as a distributor of new information technologies to the French and European market, which secondarily provided training in the use of its products. Valtech now positions itself as a pure knowledge‑transfer firm that instructs clients in the strategic use and development of cutting‑edge electronic technologies. Valtech organized itself according to KM principles in 1993, but only became aware of KM as a formal organizing framework in 1998. While the adoption of KM is often "pushed" onto companies by the academic or consulting communities, Valtech pulled itself toward KM organizing logics by the New Age of business it defined for itself. It is in this way an excellent example of strategic commitment and organizational design from a KM perspective. It is also relatively unique in that most of the literature records KM adoption from a "push" rather than a "pull" perspective.

To move beyond the technology focus and adequately embrace knowledge, organisations need a working conceptualisation of knowledge. Within the literature, the dominant conceptualisation converges around the acknowledgement of tacit and explicit types distinctly. This paper argues that a more fundamental approach is necessary. The functional view is a theory on the nature of knowledge that serves as a promising alternative. By placing knowledge within the context of goals and formalisation possibilities, it can help transform organisations from information‑intensive to truly knowledge‑based.

Knowledge is a topic that covers many disciplines with writers attempting to formulate an understanding of it and its relevance to their field. Philosophical frameworks may offer a way to gain a deeper appreciation of its relevance to management and organisations, looking in particular at Socrates, Plato and Aristotle.

Existing tools that are used to support the process of transferring tacit knowledge into explicit . knowledge do not support the affection of individuals and their knowledge, but rather data and information processing. A more personalised view of knowledge is required, and a toolbox has been constructed in order to increase the individual's capacity to describe hisher own situation within organisations. This is assumed to motivate the person to contribute with knowledge. An empirical investigation of a prototypical nature has been conducted. The empirical results are positive for eliciting knowledge.

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.

The transfer of knowledge between groups of individuals of different levels of expertise and orientation is discussed with reference to the manner in which knowledge is disseminated using the specialist language of a given domain. A prototype system that allows access to knowledge at these different levels, through the automatic construction of keyword indexes, is outlined. The controversial relationship between knowledge and language is the basis of arguments in this paper.

There are aspects of New Product Development (NPD) business processes that pose particularly difficult challenges to Organizational Learning systems. Short product and process life cycles compress the available time window for recouping the expenses associated with product development. Cross‑functional collaboration in product development organizations requires the merging of knowledge from diverse disciplinary and personal skills‑based perspectives. Cross‑institutional collaboration leads a requirement for knowledge to be combined from participants across multiple collaborating organizations. Transient existence in teams and high turnover results in a reduction in organizational knowledge unless there is a repository for knowledge rather than a dependence on knowledge which is situated in the minds of individuals. High rates of change in turbulent industries, such as electronics, motivates participants in NPD processes to effectively overcome these Organizational Learning challenges. The potential payoff includes time saved by not repeating mistakes and reuse of knowledge that leads to successful products and processes. IS research has paid little attention to NPD processes despite the fact that some IS appears to have the potential to have an impact in that area. Recent research completed by these researchers in Analog Devices Inc identified Organizational Learning challenges encountered by engineering teams in product development. This paper will report on these challenges and will describe how systems were developed to support organizational learning to support the product development process.