Knowledge management system for fourth generation

R&D: KNOWVATION
*
Yongtae Park
*
, Seonwoo Kim
Department of Industrial Engineering, College of Engineering, Seoul National University (SNU), San 56-1,
Shillim-Dong, Gwanak-Gu, Seoul 151-742, South Korea
Abstract
Since the advent of the embryonic model almost a century ago, R&D systems have gone through an evolutionary process of development
that can be classied into three generations. Today, the fourth generation of R&D is emerging that emphasizes both strategic and operational
importance of knowledge management (KM). Despite the importance of KM, the network between conceptual scheme of the fourth
generation R&D and practical system of KM remains a missing link. In response, the main objective of this paper is to present a framework
for designing and implementing knowledge management system (KMS) for the fourth generation R&D. The proposed system is named
KNOWVATION, which combines the notions of knowledge and innovation. First, the evolutionary classication of the R&D generations
and the corresponding characteristics of the respective generations are dened. Second, the organizational structure and knowledge functions
of the fourth generation R&D are derived. Finally, the overall design framework and detailed sub-modules are presented.
q 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Fourth generation R&D; Knowledge management; System; KNOWVATION; System design
1. Introduction
Since the advent of the embryonic model almost a
century ago, R&D systems have gradually and continuously
evolved over time. Roughly speaking, this growth path can
be classied into three generations, from the rst generation
to the third generation, in line with technology development
and environmental change (Amidon, 1996; Kerssens-Van
et al., 1996; Rothwell, 1994; Roussel et al., 1991; Tiwana,
2000; Zack, 1999).
The longevity and traits of the rst generation are clear.
Starting from the beginning of the 20th century and lasting
until the 1960s, the rst generation paid little attention to the
economic management of R&D, but gave free rein to
science-based R&D labs, which acted as independent cost
centers. Although it is rather difcult to make a precise
demarcation between the second and third generations, the
former is characterized by scientic and microscopic
management of R&D during the 19701980s, whereas the
latter is delineated by the strategic and holistic management
of R&D during the 1990s.
Today, the fourth generation of R&D is emerging (Miller
and Moriss, 1999). The main objective of the fourth
generation R&D systems is to identify the latent needs of
prospective customers and secure the technical feasibility
and marketability simultaneously in the very early stages. To
this end, the modern R&D system magnies the role of
information technology (Barthes and Tacla, 2002; Dennis
et al., 1998) and also emphasizes the platform and
architecture of the whole system. In this regard, knowledge
management (KM) becomes an indispensable requisite of
fourth generation R&D. KM is essential not only as an
operational vehicle, but also as a systematic building block.
Further, another version of this chronological taxonomy
argues that this latest stage should be regarded as the fth
generation, rather than the fourth, in that the crucial asset is
not the customer, but the knowledge (Amidon, 1996). In fact,
the R&Dprocess can primarily be considered as a knowledge
management process, because it transforms information on
technological advancements and market demands into
knowledge which can be used for developing new product
0166-4972/$ - see front matter q 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2004.10.008
Technovation 26 (2006) 595602
www.elsevier.com/locate/technovation
*
It is conrmed that this item has not been published nor is currently
being submitted elsewhere.
* Corresponding author. Tel.: C82 2 880 8358; fax: C82 2 878 3511.
E-mail address: parkyt@cybernet.snu.ac.kr (Y. Park).
concepts and process designs (Kerssens-Van et al., 1996;
Nieto, 2002).
Despite their intrinsically close relationship, the practical
network between fourth generation R&D and KM has
remained a missing link. In practice, the distinctive needs
and characteristics of the fourth generation R&D still
remain to be materialized in the form of an operational
system or specialized knowledge management system
(KMS). The pool of existing KMSs is abundant and each
is useful in terms of its technical performance and
operational efciency. However, none of the existing
commercial KMSs are R&D-specialized solutions, but
rather are general-purpose solutions. They tend to focus
on generic knowledge functions such as data registration,
storage and retrieval. Recognizing the fact that the evolution
into the fourth generation of R&D requires a restructuring of
system architectures and a reorienting of system goals, the
KMS for the fourth generation R&D must be tailored to the
special-purpose needs of this new era.
In response to this demand, the primary objective of this
paper is to propose a framework for designing and
implementing a KMS for the fourth generation R&D. The
proposed system is named KNOWVATION. The term was
coined by combining two crucial notions, knowledge and
innovation. This paper is organized as follows. Firstly,
based on a review of the literature, the major functions of a
general-purpose KMS are identied. Secondly, the organ-
izational structure and knowledge functions of fourth
generation R&D are determined. Thirdly, we derive the
requisite KMS functions by mapping the fourth generation
R&D operations to the conventional organizational struc-
ture. Finally, the overall framework and detailed sub-
modules are described. One particular sub-module is
described in detail for the purpose of illustration.
2. Review of KM activities and KMS functions
In essence, KM comprises two major pillars, KM
activities and KMS functions. KM activities represent the
process perspective of KM and are dened as those generic
activities that enable the knowledge management process to
be accomplished. On the other hand, KMS functions deal
with the technology perspective and are dened as those
functions that facilitate and/or supplement KM activities by
providing specic and practical technologies and/or tools.
Thus, even for the same KM activity, individual KMSs may
differ from one another in terms of the conceptual design of
the KM functions and the practical implementation of the
KM tools.
Thus far, a number of researchers have attempted to
classify the major activities of KM. Among these, the most
frequently cited work may well be that of Nonaka and
Takeuchi (1995). These authors focused on the dynamics of
knowledge activities and suggested that the four major
activities of KM are socialization, externalization,
combination and internalization. Despite its seminal
contribution, this list of activities is too conceptual and
even philosophical to be used in actual practice. Other
versions are abundant. For instance, Tiwana (2000)
suggested three fundamental activities; acquisition, sharing
and utilization. Ruggles (1997) proposed such activities as
generation, codication and transfer. Marquardt (1996)
suggested four activities; acquisition, creation, utilization
and storage. Wiggs (1993) version consists of four
activities: creation and sourcing, compilation and trans-
formation, dissemination, and application and value realiz-
ation. Van der Spek and Spijkervet (1996) proposed four
activities: developing, securing, distributing and combining.
Some other researchers presented more extensive frame-
works consisting of six activities, namely acquire, select,
internalize, use, generate and externalize (Holsapple and
Joshi, 2002), or eight activities, viz. identify, capture, select,
store, share, apply, create and sell (Liebowitz and Beckman,
1998). In the current study, based on the review of the
literature that we conducted, we suggest the following list of
major knowledge activities: acquisition, organization,
utilization, disposition and sharing. Table 1 shows the list
of major KM activities and related sub-activities.
As in the case of KM activities, previous research on
KMS functions or tools is abundant. Generally, KMS
functions are classied according to either the technology
used or the method employed to support the KM activities.
To name but a few, Tyndale (2002) derived 16 KMS
functions from the main technological properties, Wensley
(2000) focused on the application of web-based information
Table 1
Knowledge activities and features
Major-activities Sub-activities Features
Acquisition Gathering Identication and capture
from knowledge sources.
Searching Need for intensive
communication.
Identifying Culture that accepts new
ideas.
Organization Interpretation Identication of meaningful
knowledge.
Filtering Value nding processes.
Categorization Creation of insights, skills
and relationships.
Utilization Contextualizing Knowledge recreation.
Projecting Knowledge producing
Compacting Value adding processes.
Disposition Indexing Targeting knowledge
Collaboration Decision making
Application
Sharing Publishing Disseminating and making
available what is already
known
Dissemination Collaboration and
collaborative support
Transmission Providing timely information
Y. Park, S. Kim / Technovation 26 (2006) 595602 596
technology to KMSs, in order to distinguish nine type of
tools. Jackson (1999) reviewed 59 commercial KMSs and
categorized them into six types, based on their size and the
supporting method used for knowledge management. Zack
(1999) segmented KMS system tools into integrative
applications and interactive applications. Ricardo (2001)
categorized KMSs into four kinds of tools. In addition, Park
et al. (2003) proposed a classication scheme comprising
six functions and/or tools. Based on our review of literature,
we suggest the following KMS functions or tools: knowl-
edge portal, document management system, information
retrieval system, workow management system, collabora-
tive system and analysis system. Table 2 summarizes the
major KMS functions and related sub-functions.
Most of the research which has been done on knowledge
activities was conducted by academics, whereas commercial
KMS solutions were developed by practitioners. As a result,
the link between KM activities and KMS functions is rather
weak, if not inexistent. In an attempt to bridge this gap,
Table 3 shows a guideline for linking knowledge activities
and KMS functions. It describes the supporting-supported
relationship between KMS functions and knowledge
activities. This guideline can be used as a building block
for designing and developing KMS. In particular, the
proposed guideline provides some useful checkpoints for
customizing the design of the KMS in accordance with the
specic needs of organizations. That is, in order to
customize the KMS design, an analysis of knowledge
activities is carried out for the organization of interest, which
allows the related KMS functions to be identied that
support the respective activities. It should be noted,
however, that there might exist multiple links between
these two aspects of KM. That is, one particular activity may
be supported by multiple KMS functions and vice versa.
3. The procedural structure of the knowledge
management system
The process of R&D has been studied extensively over
the past 30 years and there are several general and/or
empirical models. The denition of R&D process varies
according to the objective of the research, such as the
process itself (Utterback, 1974), the success/failure of
product development (Pinto and Mantel, 1990), and the
decision to terminate or continue an R&D project
(Balachandra, 1989; Pilar et al., 2004). In current research,
KMSs are dened on the basis of Igal and Joels R&D
process denition, which is composed of eight stages. Their
research corresponds closely to the concept of fourth
generation R&D, whose objective is platform development
rather than product development, since it focuses on the
process of hi-tech industrial product development. In
addition, it suits the characteristics of KNOWVATION
well, since innovation decisions are established stage-by-
stage.
Fig. 1 shows the KMS module based on Igal and Joels
R&D process denition. The planning for market strategy
Table 2
KMS Functions
KMS Functions Sub-functions Description
Knowledge portal Integrated interface Personalization facilities
Link management Set of information categories
Annotations Subsequent navigation
Information retrieval Search agents Obtained from search engines
User proling Used for searching and recalling data
Visualization Looking for both specic terms and related terms
Finding experts
Document management Finding documents Store les in a central library
Version control Control of access to les
Metadata Management Changes in the managed documents
Permissions Management Search documents on either content or index terms
Emulating paper/document
Workow management Process denition (Obtained from?) traditional owcharting tools
Task assignment Facilitating the work of a group
Authority Delivering work items to appropriate users
Management Invoking appropriate applications and utilities
Process modeling and management
Collaboration CoP* Setting up bulletin boards
Chatting Real-time conferencing, whiteboards and chat rooms.
Conferencing Vital to knowledge sharing
Mailing
Analysis User analysis (Obtained from?) information systems
Market analysis (Complementary?) with information technology
Knowledge analysis Supporting decisions
CoP, Community of practice.
Y. Park, S. Kim / Technovation 26 (2006) 595602 597
and technology strategy is supported by the industry
and market analysis module. The generation of ideas for
the dominant design module supports idea screening at the
early stage and technology feasibility evaluation. The
acquisition, organization and utilization of information
and knowledge during the R&D process are supported by
the project screening and monitoring module, the project
scheduling and sourcing module and the research output
and knowledge asset management module. The process
management and document management modules support
the disposition and sharing of information and knowledge.
Finally, the commercialization and business-modeling
module support business modeling process, including the
development of the market strategy and subsequent
commercialization. Business modeling as part of a
comprehensive concept is required to launch a new
product onto the market, since the objective of fourth
generation R&D is to develop and satisfy the latent needs
of the customers.
4. KMS functions for fourth generation R&D
As mentioned, the KNOWVATION system is named
after a combination of the words Knowledge and
Innovation and is designed to cover eight modules referred
to in the analysis of the R&D process. The guideline for
linking knowledge activities and KMSfunctions provides the
basic building block for designing the KMS. However, since
the current study proposes an extended and customized KMS
to support fourth generation R&D, it is necessary to diversify
the range of functions, covering not only data processing, but
also knowledge analysis and creation. As shown in Table 3,
the existing KMS functions concentrate on the acquisition
and sharing of knowledge. New KMS functions, therefore,
should be added to implement the KNOWVATION system,
which aims to include knowledge analysis and creation.
To this end, we develop an overall matrix, comprising
two major dimensions, namely the organizational dimen-
sion and the operational dimension. As mentioned above,
Table 3
Linkage between Knowledge Activities and KMS Functions
KMS functions Knowledge activities
Acquisition Organization Utilization Disposition Sharing
Portal Integrated interface
Link management
Annotations
Information retrieval Search agents
User proling
Visualization
Expert ndings
Document
management
Finding documents
Version control
Metadata management
Permission management
Workow
management
Process denition
Task assignment
Authority management
Collaboration CoP
Chatting
Conferencing
Mailing
Analysis User analysis
Market analysis
Knowledge analysis
Fig. 1. KNOWVATION modules and innovation process.
Y. Park, S. Kim / Technovation 26 (2006) 595602 598
all of the organizations and capabilities of a rm should
participate in R&D from the very early stages. Hence, the
organizational dimension is dened in general terms
comprising the entire organization of the rm in question.
However, the dimensions can be subdivided and modied
depending on the features of the organization used for the
implementation. The organizational dimension accounts for
the principal management organizations in a corporation and
includes the following ve divisions: the strategy division,
R&D division, nance division, production division and
marketing division. The operational dimension includes the
structural module of the KNOWVATION system, but
excludes the document management and process manage-
ment modules. These two modules are excluded due to their
irrelevance to knowledge analysis and creation.
By combining these two dimensions, organizational and
operational dimensions, the overall matrix is developed, as
shown in Table 4. Note that the matrix may encompass
numerous possible cells and that the matrix mainly focuses
on analysis and creation. The development process and
decision criteria for customized KM are subjective and rm-
specic.
5. Overall system of KNOWVATION
Based on the matrix and conventional KMS functions,
the KNOWVATION system is designed to cover the eight
modules and 25 related KM functions which can support
knowledge analysis and creation. Table 5 shows the list of
modules and functions. These 25 newly proposed functions
could be connected with general information systems such
as groupware as well as with conventional KMSs. Not all of
the 25 functions have to be used, but they are available as
the building blocks, which can be used for constructing
knowledge management system. A range of KNOWVA-
TION types can be constructed depending on the rm being
investigated and the characteristics of the industry to which
the rm belongs.
6. System design methodology for KNOWVATION
There exist a number of system design methodologies,
including the Generic Tasks approach, the Problem Solving
Methods approach and the CommonKADS methodologies.
Among these, we opted for CommonKADS as the basic
methodology to implement KNOWVATION, because it has
some superior features compared to the others. It is well
documented and some support tools exist. In addition,
CommonKADS implements many of the best features of
the other knowledge level specication methodologies
(Allsopp et al., 2002).
CommonKADS is a methodology for the development of
knowledge based systems, which is the result of the Esprit-II
Table 4
KM requirements for fourth generation R&D
Oper. Orga.
Strategy division R&D division Finance division Production division Marketing division
Industry and market
analysis
Industry analysis Technology position Finance structure Resource analysis Competition
structure
Idea generation for
dominant design
Technology trend Technology opportunity Production value Needs analysis
Project screening and
monitoring
Project selection Technology fusion Success/failure
analysis
Project scheduling and
sourcing
Product portfolio Technology outsourcing Technology roadmap
Research output/
knowledge asset
Patent map Industry standard Marketability test
Commercialization/
business modeling
Technology
valuation
Cash ow prediction Production efciency
test
Competitor analysis
Table 5
KNOWVATION module and KMS functions
Major modules Functions
Industry and market analysis Industry analysis
Technology position
Finance structure
Resource analysis
Competition structure
Idea generation for dominant design Technology trend
Technology opportunity
Production value
Needs analysis
Project screening and monitoring Project selection
Technology fusion
Success/failure analysis
Project scheduling and sourcing Project portfolio
Technology outsourcing
Technology roadmap
Research output and knowledge
asset
Patent map
Industry standard management
Marketability test
Commercialization and business
modeling
Technology valuation
Cash ow prediction
Production efciency test
Competitor analysis
Process management Workow analysis
Document management Knowledge sharing with security
Output management
Y. Park, S. Kim / Technovation 26 (2006) 595602 599
project (P5248) KADS-II. CommonKADS supports most
aspects of knowledge-based system (KBS) development
projects, including project management, organizational
analysis, knowledge acquisition, conceptual modeling,
user interaction, system integration and design.
It describes KBS development from two perspectives:
the result perspective and the project management perspec-
tive. The former is a set of models of different aspects of the
KBS and its environment that are continuously improved
during the project life-cycle. The latter is a risk-driven
generic spiral life-cycle model that can be congured into a
process adapted to the particular project. CommonKADS
consists of four main models, the task model, communi-
cation model, agent model and knowledge model.
In spite of its wide usefulness, CommonKADS needs to
be modied for KNOWVATION, which is a KMS
specialized in R&D. The principal interest of current
research is to identify those specic and specialized
functions of the KMS that can be linked to R&D.
The modied design framework for KNOWVATION,
which is based on CommonKADS, is shown in Table 6.
This framework shows the overall aspects, but is not
intended to describe the detailed process at the bottom level.
The framework consists of two parts, denition
and structure. The former part includes the basic denition
of each function and delineates the critical factors. The latter
part shows the required resources and actors. In addition, it
also denes the providers and end-users of the knowledge
and information, and shows the processes of knowledge
utilization. Consequently, it is possible to trace out every
process during which specic knowledge is generated,
codied and transferred
7. Illustrative function: project portfolio monitoring
The project screening and monitoring module which can
support strategic R&D management is employed for the
purpose of illustration. Project Portfolio Monitoring (PPM)
is a function of the project screening and monitoring
module. It observes the whole project at the macro level and
supports decision-making activities, such as efcient
resource allocation and selected focusing.
Table 7 describes the PPM function. As a knowledge
provider, the project manager inputs information on the
proposal or progress of a project. The strategy team retrieves
information, which helps to make a decision. The project
information is analyzed on the basis of environmental
information and previous best practice. The results of the
analysis are then handed to the decision makers, after being
processed in the system in such a way as to facilitate the
decision.
It is necessary to produce various types of portfolio, since
it decision makers, such as the CEO and CTO, may need to
analyze from various points of view during the R&D
process. A project is characterized by the four main
Table 6
Framework for KNOWVATION design
Specication Denition
Function denition Description General function description
Critical factor Process Critical factors for process performance
Output Critical factors for output
Function structure Input Input knowledge Required knowledge
Knowledge provider Person or division that is a provider not an owner
Process Resource Required resources or expected input knowledge
Knowledge creator Person/division that executes process
Output Output knowledge Outcome of process
Knowledge form Form of output knowledge
Decision-maker Person/division that uses output knowledge to make a
decision
Table 7
Project Portfolio Management function
Specication Denition
Function denition Description Project analysis and evaluation at macro level, hence supports decision-making
Critical factor Process Firms capacity analysis,
Output The quality of the project prole and the number of dimensions of the portfolio
Function structure Input Input knowledge Project prole
Knowledge provider Each project manager
Process Resource Environmental information, previous best practice
Knowledge creator Strategy team
Output Output knowledge Project portfolio
Knowledge form Visual maps such as pie-charts, histograms, matrices and tableaux
Decision-maker CTO, CEO
Y. Park, S. Kim / Technovation 26 (2006) 595602 600
dimensions of time, size, actors and subject. The sub-
dimensions and operational denitions of each dimension
are summarized in Table 8.
The PPM function supplies various diagrams, tables and
matrices, which adopt the dimensions shown in Table 8 for
the purpose of supporting the four types of decision making.
These are referred to as resource allocation, technology
development policy, project magnitude and portfolio
possibilities, Theoretically, the number of combinations of
10 dimensions is more than the number of combinations in
the matrix shown in Fig. 2, however, only those combi-
nations that are useful for making a strategic decision are
adopted. After being analyzed by the strategy team,
the project portfolio information is handed to the decision
makers in the form of the table and matrix shown on the
right-hand side of Fig. 2. The proposed gures on the right-
hand side show the relationship between the cost of R&D
spent to support decisions on resource allocation and the
importance of technology. The decision makers can make
use of these matrices and tables, which show the relationship
between the eld and newness of the technology, on the one
hand, and the R&D cost and manpower on the other hand.
8. Concluding remarks
In this study, we proposed a framework for designing and
implementing a KMS for the fourth generation R&D. The
proposed system rst species the R&D process based on a
review of the NPD process and innovation process. The
major modules of the KNOWVATION system are dened
for the purpose of supporting the R&D process. To cover
knowledge creation and analysis, the KM requirements are
developed using an organizational structure and appropriate
Table 8
Dimensions of Portfolio
Major dimension Sub-dimension Operational denition
Time Length of project Duration of R&D project
Time-to-completion Time remaining until completion of project
Size Cost of R&D Total expenditure of project
Manpower of R&D Number of participating researchers
Actor Mode of R&D Mode of conducting project
Department of R&D Research unit conducting project
Subject Field of technology Characteristic of research area
Newness of technology Status in lifecycle of technology
Importance of technology Relative importance of technology for the
organization
Difculty of technology Degree of development difculty
Fig. 2. The Project Portfolio Management function.
Y. Park, S. Kim / Technovation 26 (2006) 595602 601
system modules. Then, the major modules and related KMS
functions are identied. Finally, the framework for the
system design is presented.
The proposed system denes the whole R&D process,
from the early R&D stage to the nal commercialization
stage, and comprises functions which facilitate activities at
each stage and, supports the participation of all of the actors
in the process of R&D and knowledge creation. Also, the
KMS can be customized by combining different modules
and functions, in accordance with the features of the specic
rm being investigated, owing to the hierarchy of modules
and functions.
The current study is rather exploratory in nature, since
it attempts to bridge the gap between generic KMSs and
the specic needs of R&D. Consequently, despite its
meaningful contribution, some discrepancies and missing
links still remain that need to be extended and elaborated
on in the future. Although the existing KMS functions are
enlarged upon here, its integration with existing IT
systems such as groupware is not taken into account.
This study is also subject to limitation in that the
framework focuses only on the macro level. In order to
develop a more detailed process at the micro level, a more
sophisticated design tool may be required, such as IDEF
methodology. These tasks account for the research themes
of future research.
Acknowledgements
This research was funded by the National Research Lab
(NRL) program of the Ministry of Science and Technology
of Korea.
References
Allsopp, D.J., Harrison, A., Sheppard, C., 2002. A database for reusable
CommonKADS agent specication components. Knowledge-Base
System 15, 275283.
Amidon, D., 1996. The challenge of fth generation R&D. Research
Technology Management 39 (4), 3341.
Balachandra, R., 1989. Early Winning Signals for R&DProjects. Lexington
Books, Boston.
Barthes, J., Tacla, C., 2002. Agent-supported portals and knowledge
management in complex R&Dprojects. Computers in Industry 48, 316.
Dennis, R., Flavin, P., Davies, G., 1998. Online R&D management: the way
forward. R&D Management 28 (1), 2735.
Holsapple, C.W., Joshi, K.D., 2002. Knowledge manipulation activities:
results of a Delphi study. Information & Management 39 (6), 477490.
Jackson, C., 1999. Process to Product-Creating Tools for Knowledge
Management Proceedings of Conference in Lisbon.
Kerssens-Van, D.I., Weerd-Nederhof, P., Fisscher, O., 1996. Describing the
issues of knowledge management in R&D: towards a communication
and analysis tool. R&D Management 26 (3), 213230.
Liebowitz, J., Beckman, T., 1998. Knowledge Organizations: What Every
Manager Should Know. St Lucie Press, Boca Raton.
Marquardt, M., 1996. Building the Learning Organization. McGraw Hill,
New York.
Miller, W.L., Moriss, L., 1999. Fourth Generation R&D. Wiley, New York.
Nieto, M., 2002. From R&D management to knowledge management: an
overview of studies on innovation management. Technological
Forecasting and Social Change 70 (2), 135161.
Nonaka, I., Takeuchi, H., 1995. The Knowledge-Creating Company.
Oxford University Press, New York.
Park, Y., Choi, C., Kim, S., 2003. On the Linkage Between Knowledge
Activities and Knowledge Management System Functions, Proceedings
of DSI and APDSI 2003, Shanghai 2003.
Pilar, C., Munuera-Alema, J.L., Rodrguez-Escudero, A.I., 2004. Criteria
employed for go/no-go decisions when developing successful highly
innovative products. Industrial Marketing Management 33, 307316.
Pinto, J.K., Mantel, S.J., 1990. The cause of project failure. IEEE
Transaction on Engineering Management 37, 269276.
Ricardo, F.J., 2001. Hypertext and Knowledge Management Proceedings of
the Twelfth ACM conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia, A

rhus.
Rothwell, R., 1994. Industrial innovation: success, strategy, trends, in:
Dodgson, M., Rothwell, R. (Eds.), The Handbook of Industrial
Innovation. Edward Elgar Publishing, Vermont, pp. 3353.
Roussel, P.A., Kamal, N.S., Tamar, J.E., 1991. in: Little, A.D. (Ed.), Third
Generation R&D. Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
Ruggles, R.L., 1997. Knowledge Management Tools. Butterworth-
Heinemann, Boston.
Tiwana, A., 2000. The Knowledge Management Toolkit. Prentice Hall
PTR, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Tyndale, P., 2002. A taxonomy of knowledge management software tools:
origins and applications. Evaluation and ProgramPlanning 25, 183190.
Utterback, J.M., 1974. Innovation in industry and the diffusion of
technology. Science 183 (4125), 620626.
Van der Spek, R., Spijkervet, A., 1996. Knowledge Management, Dealing
Intelligently with Knowledge. Kenniscentrum CIBIT, Utrecht.
Wensley, A., 2000. Tools for Knowledge Management, BPRC Conference
on Knowledge Management: Concepts and Controversies.
Wigg, K.M., 1993. Knowledge Management Foundations: Thinking about
Thinking-How People and Organizations Create, Represent and Use
Knowledge. Schema Press, Arlington Texas.
Zack, M.H., 1999. Managing codied knowledge. Sloan Management
Review 40 (4), 4558.
Yongtae Park is a faculty member of the Department of Industrial
Engineering and director of Graduate Program of Technology
Management at the Seoul National University (SNU). He holds BS in
industrial engineering (from SNU), MS and PhD in operations
management (both from University of Wisconsin-Madison). His
research interests lie in areas of industrial knowledge network,
knowledge management system, new product/service development,
and on-line business modeling. Dr. Park has published numerous
articles in, to name a few, Technovation, International Journal of
Production Research, Decision Sciences, Technology Analysis and
Strategic Management, R&D Management, Technology in Society,
Technology Forecasting and Social Change.
Seonwoo Kim is doctoral candidate at SNU. He holds BS and MS in
industrial engineering (both from SNU). His dissertation research has
focused on design and implementation of knowledge management
system.
Y. Park, S. Kim / Technovation 26 (2006) 595602 602