The Impact of Project Management Offices

Vol.
28 计算机集成制造系统 ISSN
No.12 Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems 1006-5911
The Impact of Project Management Office's Role on

Knowledge Management: A Systematic Review
Study
Mohammad Salameh 1, Abdallah Taamneh2,3, Abdelkarim Kitana4, Ahmad Aburayya5,
Fanar Shwedeh5, Said Salloum6, Khaled Shaalan1, Deepanjana Varshney7
1
Faculty of Engineering &IT, The British University in Dubai, 345015, Dubai, UAE;
2
Assistant Professor, Human Resource Management Department, City University
Ajman, UAE;
3
Assistant Professor, Department of Human Resource Management, Jadara University,
Irbid, Jordan;
4
Associate Professor, Human Resource Management Department, City University
Ajman, UAE;
5
Assistant Professor, Business Administration College, MBA Department, City University
Ajman, UAE;
6
School of Science, Engineering, and Environment, University of Salford, Salford M5
4WT, UK;
7
Professor, Business Administration College, City University Ajman, UAE;
Abstract:
The purpose of this study is to review the research on the function and impact of project
management offices (PMOs) in knowledge management (KM) and to establish the current body
of knowledge by addressing the following questions: What function does the PMO play in the
knowledge management process, and what types of knowledge does the PMO deal with? The
study includes a systematic literature review for six papers on project management office (PMO)
role and impact on knowledge management. PRISMA guidelines were used to select the papers
and the research focused on the most important six papers to investigate the research questions.
The study findings revealed that PMO plays a vital role in boosting information usefulness by
sharing the correct knowledge with the right people at the right time. Furthermore, PMO is
important for maintaining knowledge repositories, which comprise knowledge generated from
projects in the form of lessons learned, updated project management standards, and individual
learning that becomes organizational learning.
Keywords: project management offices; knowledge management; systematic literature review
DOI: 10.24297/j.cims.2022.12.59
Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems 846

Vol.28 计算机集成制造系统 ISSN
1. Introduction
Every organization executes number of projects, these projects produce a lot of knowledge in
form of lessons learnt, project documentations & templates, process improvement feedback [1]–
[3]. In this study, the research reviews the type of knowledge projects produce and what is the role
of PMO in managing this knowledge. Project Management knowledge management (KM)
includes two parts as per [4]: 1) utilizing existing knowledge and 2) producing a new knowledge
[5]–[8]. The Knowledge from previous projects will be used to improve current projects
performance [9]–[11], while the knowledge created by current projects is shared with future
initiatives [12], [13]. Even the best knowledge management tools will not help in capturing
personal expertise because we cannot force people to share unless people feel motivated to share
their knowledge [14]–[16], for that purpose project management knowledge management is
concerned with managing both explicit and tacit knowledge in particular. It is critical to foster a
culture of collaboration and trust in order for people to feel organically driven to share their
knowledge with their peers. Also, engaging the project management office (PMO) to play the
broker role to manage knowledge flow between the projects.
Project Management Institute [4] project management office is a department in the organization
structure standardizes project management processes and facilitates the sharing of resources,
methodologies, tools, and techniques. The PMO provides support to the projects managers to let
them do a proper a project management and comply with the best practice standards or can
provide manage all projects or some of them. The PMO can serve as a repository for project
management templates, guidelines, and metrics. According to [17], the PMO's function has
evolved over time: in the 1800s, the project office was a type of national agricultural governance;
in 1939, the term "project management office" was first published; and in the 1950s, the 1950s
concept of the PMO is representative of what a contemporary PMO looks like. PMOs today are
dynamic entities that are utilized to handle specific problems. Many PMOs base project
management concepts on industry-standard techniques like PRINCE2 or PMBOK.
The degree of control and influence that PMOs have on projects is determined by the type of PMO
structure within the organization; it can be supportive with a consultative role, controlling with a
consultative role and requiring a level of compliance for all projects, or directive with control and

management of projects. Due to the increasing demand of PMO to play an important role on
projects success in the organizations, knowledge Management (KM) has been identified as one of
the important success factor for project success which increase organization performance by
improving the implementation of future projects. The project management office (PMO) plays a
crucial role in knowledge management in an organization as per PMI.
In this study, the researcher tried to answer a number of questions, 1) What are the types of
knowledge PMO deal with, 2) what’s the project management office (PMO) role in managing
generated knowledge. Due to the scarcity of publications found in database searches despite
using several keyword combinations, the researcher concludes that the subject is interesting for
thorough research and proposes an alternative future research avenue. The study equips PMO
stakeholders with the necessary information to comprehend the PMO's function and influence in
the knowledge management process.
2. Methodology
The researcher followed PRISMA guidelines for systematic review [18]–[30] as shown in Figure 1,
which is described below.

Figure 1. PRISMA flowchart.

First, Identified the questions research was interested to answer, the keywords, and inclusion and
exclusion criteria [25], [31]–[42]. This study was focused on the research that are related to project
management office (PMO) and knowledge management (KM) to identify new areas for future
studies and research. The authors wanted to know which topics have been studied in project
management office (PMO) role and impact on knowledge management (KM) process and what
the other researchers found in their studies which answer the questions formulated as follow, 1)
what the types of knowledge are produced from the projects, 2) what project management office
(PMO) role in is managing this knowledge.
The research used a several keywords to locate the relevant studies (project management office,
program management office, PMO, and knowledge management). The inclusion criteria were
case studies, literature review, English language, Scopus database. The literature review included
all papers published until 2022.

Second, once the relevant questions and keywords had been specified, the authors accessed
Scopus database to search using the keywords identified, then located the keywords in the title,
abstract, keywords in order to exclude irrelevant result
Third, the extracted data is stored into excel sheet including the key aspects related to research
then conduct a quality assessment on the extracted result, the authors decided to exclude book
chapters, conference review, other languages than English, and other articles related to product
management, quality management, marketing.
Fourth, the analysed the abstracts to ensure that they were relevant to the needed topic. The
authors excluded papers that are only focused on project management office or knowledge
management only, which meant they are neither related to project management office (PMO) role
nor impact on knowledge management (KM) process. This has reduced the number of papers to
six papers which fulfilled the identified criteria.
Fifth, the author analyzed the six papers and extracted the needed data and recorded it in an excel
sheet to provide descriptive analysis such as authors, year, source title, cited by, title, abstract,
publisher, source title, document type, publication stage.
Sixth, the authors established the current body of knowledge about project management office
(PMO) role and impact in knowledge management (KM) process.
Seventh, eventually, the authors discussed the findings they draw. This is specified in the following
section.
3. Findings
The authors provide their analyses in this section: general observations on the included papers,
and main findings according to the defined themes.
General observations
Due to the scarcity of papers found in database searches despite using several keyword
combinations, the subject appears to be promising for systematic and rigorous investigation and
offers a number of prospective research opportunities. The author found an aggregation of 2319

papers when searched using knowledge management and project management keywords but the
records have been reduced to thirty-nine records only when used a revised keywords related to
project management office. Among the extracted papers, twenty-two records represented journal
articles, twelve records represented conference papers, three records represented book chapters,
and one record was a conference review. The oldest publication was published in 2006 and the
most recent one published in 2022. All of them reached the final publication stage.
From the six papers that are analyzed, there were four case studies, one literature review, and one
conceptual framework, the oldest publication was in 2013 and the most recent ones was in 2021,
one paper published in 2013, 2014,2018, and 2020, and two papers published in 2021. The most
cited papers was the one published in 2013, which received more than one hundred citation
followed the paper published in 2014, which received more than thirty citation, and finally the
paper published in 2018, which receive more than ten citations. The authors noticed that four
papers published by South African Institute of Industrial Engineering and two papers by Elsevier
Ltd. From a research approach perspective, five papers used qualitative approach and one paper
used a mixed approach. The authors noticed that five papers considered the PMO in project-based
organization structure and one paper only considered the PMO in matrix organization.
1.1 Body of knowledge about PMO role and impact on knowledge management
The study summarized the main findings of the investigated studies under three themes:
1. The type of knowledge PMO deal with can be vary from project to project
2. The PMO raises KM awareness & culture in the organization
3. The PMO plays has an important role in knowledge management and knowledge transfer
between projects in specific
3.3 The type of knowledge PMO deal with can be vary from project to project
The authors linked papers to this theme which showed the different knowledge types to answer
author’s question about what type of knowledge project may produce.
Sokhanvar et al., [43] found, eight types of knowledge project may produce, 1) knowledge about
project management,2) knowledge about the new or existing procedures, 3) knowledge about
technical matters, 4) knowledge about organization customers, 5) knowledge about project cost,
6) knowledge about legal matters, 7) knowledge about the suppliers and their relation with

organization, 8) the know-how knowledge of who has it. Sokhanvar et al., [43] said that the ranking
of these knowledge is different, they found that knowledge about clients represent
18.92% of the produced knowledge, knowledge of know-how and who hast it represents 15.54%,
the knowledge about project management represents 14.86%, Knowledge cost represent 13.51%,
knowledge about suppliers represent 10.81%, and finally 8.78% for each knowledge on
(procedures, Technical, and Legal).
Sokhanvar S. et al. [43] identified eight types for the knowledge, but Tshuma B. et al. [44] found
there are three main knowledge types: project management, technological, and entrepreneurial.
Gomo N. et al., [45] assumed that the knowledge used in projects is classified into three main
knowledge groupings: 1) business knowledge, 2) technological knowledge, and 3) project
management knowledge.
3.4 The PMO raises KM awareness & culture in the organization

Under this theme, the authors mapped papers that indicate the importance of project
management office (PMO) in raising the awareness about knowledge management (KM) and
spreading knowledge culture in the organization.
Tshuma B. et al., [44] found in their research that to support knowledge transfer, the organization
should create awareness about the importance of knowledge transfer between the projects also
they should support spreading knowledge transfer culture. Tshuma B. et al., [44] observed this is
achieved when 1) The PMO conducted focus group meetings to create knowledge transfer
awareness. 2) Created knowledge transfer awareness by conducting a project acceleration and
coaching training (PACT) also it was very useful in transferring the knowledge produced from the
project. 3) The PMO organized workshops to spread the awareness of knowledge transfer
importance. Tshuma B. et al., [44] found that a successful knowledge internalization raises the
awareness about knowledge transfer importance between the projects and this will ensure the
stakeholders spend most of their time in knowledge management, and be dedicated till they
recognize the value of knowledge according to [44], [46] have found that developing knowledge
management processes will be easy once the awareness of knowledge and its importance has
been created, and this will happen once the PMO who play a mediator role created environment
encourage the projects managers and all stakeholders to recognize the importance of knowledge
transfer.

Van Waveren et al., [47] observed that project team members sometimes do not see knowledge
transfer as one of their goals because they focus on their project’s tasks. Knowledge Research
Institute [46], [48] believe that the PMO is important to spread knowledge culture between team
members and let them recognize knowledge importance, this can happen by conducting
workshops and meetings which may eliminate or reduce at least the focus on the short-term goals
by project team members.
Pemsel S. et al., [49] observed according to Walker et al., that the PMO provides knowledge
network structure allow sharing knowledge expertise between individuals, groups on all
organizational levels which promotes the learning by individuals and groups to improve
knowledge sharing.
3.5 The PMO plays has an important role in knowledge management and knowledge
transfer between projects in specific
TSokhanvar et al., [43] observed in their case study the PMO should first improve knowledge
capture practices and procedures, then build appropriate practices for knowledge generation, and
finally develop some fundamental practices for knowledge transfer, such as training and
mentorship. Sokhanvar et al. [43] have recommended in their conclusion, that the PMO will be
able to increase the knowledge management efficiency when integrate project management
practices with knowledge management practices and that will happen by understanding the
current project management system in the organization. According to [43], the PMO provides
team members with tools, standards and practices to assist them by providing different types of
knowledge such as: 1) project management Knowledge through project management
methodology and standards, 2) Client Knowledge by developing KM practices, and 3) know-how
knowledge and who has it by identifying required knowledge management practices. Sokhanvar
et al. said, since the PMO supposed to develop a project management framework to establish a
common project management language between the projects in which enable healthy project
environments.
Tshuma B et al., [44] in their literature review tried to simulate the PMO role and impact by
developing conceptual framework. The framework shows the moderation, support, mediation,
and facilitation roles that PMO can play to transfer the knowledge between the projects in the
organization. Tshuma B et al., [44] believed the model may support and increase the efficiency of
project-based organizations which lead to gain a competitive advantage in the market. Tshuma B

et al., [44] put three main propositions their study shall justify; P1) The project management
office (PMO) manages the flow of information between projects, P2) The PMO's mediation
(facilitation) role is influenced by knowledge qualities, P3) The PMO's as a mediator increases
the utilization and impact of knowledge received. Tshuma B et al., [44] found that the PMO
creates a link between the knowledge generated and supplied on one side and the knowledge
received and used on the other side to ensure that the company reaps the greatest benefits.
Tshuma B et al., [50] developed a case study targeted the PMO in one of the multinational
engineering companies based in South Africa called Wind Power Division, Tshuma er al. observed
that the PMO plays a significant role in knowledge transfer by assisting and encouraging
knowledge flow between the organization's initiatives, [50] believe this will not be managed
effectively without the existence of the PMO. The framework [50] built showed that the PMO plays
a moderation role and link the knowledge that generated and sent with the knowledge that
received and used to improve knowledge usability and amplify its impact which increase the
competitive advantage of the organization. Tshuma B et al., [50] introduced three propositions in
their study, P1) PMOs aid in the dissemination of knowledge to the appropriate recipients at
the appropriate time, P2) The PMO's mediation role is influenced by the articulability of
knowledge, P3) The knowledge usability is improved by the PMO. Tshuma B et al., [50] observed
that the PMO have a moderation role in knowledge transfer as they assumed in their first
proposition, [50] observed that the PMO supports knowledge transfer between the projects by
focusing on enabling project management standards & methodologies, spreading knowledge
transfer culture, and improving the communication and knowledge transfer between the projects.
According to [50], the PMO should build knowledge management processes (produce, store,
transfer, protect, and use) as well as infrastructure (people, tools, routines, and systems) to foster
knowledge transfer culture and improve knowledge transfer in the organization. According to
[46], [51]–[53]. The major elements that drive knowledge transfer in organizations and define the
success of the PMO in its moderating role in the transmission of knowledge between projects are
knowledge management processes and infrastructure.
Tshuma B et al., [50] found according to [52] that the PMO improves and supports knowledge
transfer by 1) building the trust and eliminating/reducing the insecurity between project team
members, 2) ensuring that knowledge is given to the relevant stakeholders at the right time by
aligning the knowledge management infrastructure, and 3) Integrating, managing, and improving

the connection between knowledge management infrastructure and knowledge management

processes in the organization by aligning knowledge management activities. Tshuma B et al., [50]
found according to [54] that the PMO facilitates tacit knowledge transfer by establishing a
mentoring and coaching program. These programs will assist stakeholders in developing their
own expertise while accomplishing project activities and improving their capacity to communicate
while sharing knowledge with other team members. Tshuma B et al., [50] observed that the PMO
improves the usability of the transferred knowledge by filtering, aligning, and disseminating
knowledge so that the relevant knowledge only -in the required language- goes to the projects
required it at the right time without transferring irrelevant knowledge. Tshuma B et al., [50] found
according to [55] that the PMO improves the use of knowledge by managing the knowledge
repositories that consists of all generated knowledge from the projects in form of lessons learnt,
feedback on project management standards, and individual learning which become
organizational learning.
The PMO, according to [50], can have a moderating or mediating role. The moderating role entails
implementing processes, systems, and tools to ensure that the necessary knowledge is created,
saved, aligned, transferred, distributed, and utilized by other initiatives or projects. The mediating
role, on the other hand, entails maintaining control over the characteristics of generated
knowledge to be transferred efficiently to new initiatives / projects.
A case study developed by [56] with PMO participants demonstrated the knowledge transmission
across several boundaries, as well as the function and influence of the PMO in knowledge transfer
across multiple boundaries. Jhamba A. et al., [56] were interested in determining the differences
in knowledge transfer mechanisms across various boundaries.
Jhamba A. et al., [56] proposed a conceptual model included the transfer processes and transfer
boundaries as follow: T1) Knowledge transfer to the team from outside the organization . T2)
Knowledge transfer inside the organization between the team and other stakeholders outside
the team. T3) Knowledge transfer between two project teams within the PMO. T4) Knowledge
migration to and from data repositories, B1) Boundary between the project team members
and external stakeholders, B2) Boundary between internal stakeholders and project team
members, B3) Boundary between two project teams in within the PMO, B4) Boundary between
project teams and the data repository. Jhamba A. et al., [56] conducted interviews with seven

members of the PMO, inquiring about the document management system in use at the PMO and
its impact on knowledge transfer.
Jhamba A. et al., [56] found three key boundaries based on focus group sessions they conducted:
B1) Boundary between two teams, B2) Boundary between project stakeholders within the
same project, B3) Boundary between external stakeholders and project team members .
Jhamba A. et al., [56] defined a dominant process and a secondary process for each key boundary
and showed the contribution of the PMO in each one of them as follow: For B1, sharing of
documents process was a dominant process and project management process was a secondary
process, the role of the PMO in the dominant process of B1 is to make sure the projects team
produced the right documents, and makes sure the produced documents are archived and can be
retrieved easily by any other project team within the same project or/ and other projects teams in
other projects to get the access to the required knowledge. The role of the PMO in the secondary
process of B1 is to ensure that a project management system is designed to drive knowledge
transfer practices, and ensure project management processes are followed and direct project
execution specially the activities that related knowledge such as “knowledge-sharing”
“workshops”, “post implementation reviews”, “generating the right documents to the right
standard for future knowledge sharing”. For B2, meetings process was a dominant process and
sharing of documents was a secondary process, the role of the PMO in the dominant process of
B2 was to make sure that the meetings are conducted, recorded, and archived. The role of PMO in
the secondary process of B2 is to make sure documents are generated, stored, and accessible by
other users. For B3: conducting meetings was a dominant process and project management
process was secondary a process, the role of the PMO in the dominant process of B3 is to make
sure required meetings conducted, recorded, stored, and accessible by other users. The role of
the PMO in the secondary process of B3 is to make sure project management process exists to
promote knowledge transfer.
Pemsel S. et al., [49] raised question in their review asking about the capabilities that PMO have
needs to become knowledge-broker.
According to [57], Pemsel S. et al. classified PMO into two dimensions: administrative and
knowledge demanding. Administrative PMO provides administrative support to project
managers. Knowledge-intensive PMOs play an active role in monitoring project management best

practices, learning from projects (including successes and failures), and improving the
organization's project management maturity.
According to [49], the PMO is a knowledge broker because it can be a bridge between the
knowledge boundaries in the project-based organization, also the PMO domain may extent to
multiple levels in the organization and that include upper management, PMO personnel and
project teams. According [58], the PMO provides a centralized archives for the collected
knowledge from different projects either this knowledge was lessons learned or project
templates/documents, this knowledge enable the PMO to develop and maintain set of standards
and methods.
Gomo N. et al., [45] in their case study conducted with a telecommunications company based in
Southern Africa tried to discover what are knowledge transfer processes followed by the PMO in
the matrix organization. According to [58] there is a relation between the PMO and knowledge
management, the PMO develops and maintains standards and methods, provides centralized
archiving system to collect and store the knowledge produced from different projects, the PMO
also provides knowledge about reporting procedure, supports the projects managers and
provides them with some tools and systems may help in projects implementation. The
propositions have been provided by [45] and derived from the conceptual model they developed
to answer their research questions were as follow: 1) The challenges associated with the matrix
organization structure impact knowledge transfer in organization, 2) knowledge transfer roles
depend on the organizational structure, 3) The PMO play the role of knowledge broker and
organize knowledge transfer in matrix organization. 4) The PMO is needed to overcome the
functional boundaries in matrix organization by playing mediation and moderation role.
Gomo N. et al., [45] observed there are many challenges related could face the knowledge
management in the matrix organization such as the authority the projects managers have on the
projects and their role in the organization, their accessibility to the resources & the availability of
these resources, the control they have on projects budget, and administrative staff. According to
[45], the PMO act as a mediator or/and moderator sometimes to come over these challenges to
support transcending the organizational structure differences. Gomo N. et al., [45] observed that
the PMO act as a moderator for technical knowledge and as a mediator for project and business
knowledge, [45] said that transferring technical knowledge will not happen without the

involvement of the PMO. Add on that, the PMO enhanced cross-functional team collaboration
during project execution and played a moderating role by supporting knowledge transfer across
departments. The PMO played a mediation role by helping requesters in capturing business
strategy & project requirements and translate them for the functional teams.
4. Conclusion
The purpose of this study is to examine the PMO role and its impact on knowledge management
process in order to establish the existing body of knowledge by responding to the research
questions: what is PMO role in knowledge management, and what sorts of knowledge does PMO
deal with? The data are extracted from Scopus database and PRISMA guidelines are followed to
conduct a systematic literature review for selected papers. A combination of keyword are used:
PMO, Project Management Office, Program management office, and Knowledge Management.
Due to the scarcity of publications found, the authors believe that the topic is a promising for
systematic and intensive investigation. Thirty-eight was found. The oldest paper is published in
2006 while the most recent one was from 2022. Most of the selected papers (five papers)
considered the PMO in project-based organization structure and only one paper considered the
PMO in matrix organization. The main findings are summarized under three themes: 1) The type
of knowledge PMO deal with 2) The PMO raises KM awareness & culture in the organization 3)
The PMO is important for knowledge transfer between projects. Sokhanvar.S et al. [43] stated that
there are eight types of knowledge with regard to projects: 1) project Management, 2) Procedures,
3) Technical, 4) Clients 5) Project cost, 6) Legal, 7) Suppliers, and 8) know-how and who has it.
However, Tshuma et al. [44] identified three main knowledge types: 1) project management, 2)
technological, and 3) entrepreneurial. In terms of knowledge groupings, Gomo N. et al., [45].,
classified knowledge into three main groups: 1) business knowledge, 2) technological knowledge,
and 3) project management knowledge. According to Tshuma B. et al., [44], it is important to raise
the awareness of knowledge transfer importance and to spread knowledge transfer culture. PMO
plays moderating and mediating role to transfer the knowledge between the projects, which
depends on the availability of knowledge transfer infrastructures and processes. PMO improves
knowledge usability by sharing the right knowledge with the right people when they need it, and
by managing knowledge repositories that include the generated knowledge from the projects in
form of lessons learnt, updated project management standards, and individual learning which
become organizational learning PMO play important role in each knowledge boundary in both
processes, the dominant process, and the secondary process. PMO play an important role as

mediator and sometimes as a moderator to come over the challenges related to the matrix
structure that influence knowledge transfer to support transcending the organizational structure
differences.
References
1. S. A. Salloum, M. Al-Emran, and K. Shaalan, “The Impact of Knowledge Sharing on
Information Systems: A Review,” in 13th International Conference, KMO 2018, 2018.
2. R. Al-Maroof et al., “The acceptance of social media video for knowledge acquisition,
sharing and application: A com-parative study among YouTube users and TikTok Users’
for medical purposes,” Int. J. Data Netw. Sci., vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 197–214, 2021.
3. N. Alaali et al., “The impact of adopting corporate governance strategic performance in
the tourism sector: A case study in the Kingdom of Bahrain,” J. Leg. Ethical Regul. Issues,
vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 1–18, 2021.
4. Project Management Institute, A guide to the project management body of knowledge:
PMBOK Guide, Sixth ed. Newtown Square, PA, USA: Project Management Institute, 2017.
5. R. S. Al-Maroof et al., “Acceptance determinants of 5G services,” Int. J. Data Netw. Sci., vol.
5, no. 4, pp. 613–628, 2021.
6. I. Makki, N. Rahmani, M. Aljasmi, S. Mubarak10, S. A. Salloum11, and N. Alaali, “The Impact

of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Mental Health Status of Healthcare Providers in the
Primary Health Care Sector in Dubai,” 2020.
7. S. R. AlSuwaidi, M. Alshurideh, B. Al Kurdi, and A. Aburayya, “The Main Catalysts for
Collaborative R&D Projects in Dubai Industrial Sector,” in The International Conference on
Artificial Intelligence and Computer Vision, 2021, pp. 795–806.
8. E. MOUZAEK, N. ALAALI, S. A SALLOUM, and A. ABURAYYA, “An Empirical Investigation of
the Impact of Service Quality Dimensions on Guests Satisfaction: A Case Study of Dubai
Hotels,” J. Contemp. Issues Bus. Gov., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 1186–1199, 2021.
9. A. Almansoori, M. AlShamsi, S. A. Salloum, and K. Shaalan, “Critical Review of Knowledge

Management in Healthcare,” Stud. Syst. Decis. Control, vol. 295, no. January, pp. 99–119,
2021.
10. A. Alsharhan, S. Salloum, and K. Shaalan, “The Impact of eLearning as a Knowledge
Management Tool in Organizational Performance.”

11. R. Bayari, A. A. Al Shamsi, S. A. Salloum, and K. Shaalan, “Impact of knowledge management

on organizational performance,” in International Conference on Emerging Technologies
and Intelligent Systems, 2021, pp. 1035–1046.
12. F. Almatrooshi, S. Alhammadi, S. A. Salloum, and K. Shaalan, “Case Study: The Implications
of Knowledge Management Tools on the Process of Overcoming COVID19,” in
International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Intelligent Systems, 2021, pp.
613–621.
13. F. H. Mezahem, S. A. Salloum, and K. Shaalan, “Applying Knowledge Map System for
Sharing Knowledge in an Organization,” in International Conference on Emerging
Technologies and Intelligent Systems, 2021, pp. 1007–1017.
14. D. Ahmed, S. A. Salloum, and K. Shaalan, “Implementing Knowledge Management in an IT

Startup: A Case Study,” in International Conference on Emerging Technologies and
Intelligent Systems, 2021, pp. 757–766.
15. F. A. Bazargan, S. A. Salloum, and K. Shaalan, “Use of multi agent knowledge management
system in technology service providers,” in International Conference on Emerging
Technologies and Intelligent Systems, 2021, pp. 1019–1033.
16. L. Razmerita, G. Wren, and L. C. Jain, Innovations in Knowledge Management: The impact
of social media, semantic web and cloud computing. 2016.
17. E. J. Darling and S. J. Whitty, “The project management office: It’s just not what it used to
be,” Int. J. Manag. Proj. Bus., 2016.
18. S. F. S. Alhashmi et al., “A Systematic Review of the Factors Affecting the Artificial
Intelligence Implementation in the Health Care Sector.,” in AICV, 2020, pp. 37–49.
19. K. S. A. Wahdan, S. Hantoobi, S. A. Salloum, and K. Shaalan, “A systematic review of text
classification research based ondeep learning models in Arabic language,” Int. J. Electr.
Comput. Eng, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 6629–6643, 2020.
20. H. Yousuf, S. A. Salloum, A. Aburayya, M. Al-Emran, and K. Shaalan, “A systematic review of

CRYPTDB: Implementation, challenges, and future opportunities,” J. Manag. Inf. Decis. Sci.,
vol. 24, pp. 1–16, 2021.
21. D. Ahmed, S. A. Salloum, and K. Shaalan, “Knowledge Management in Startups and SMEs:
A Systematic Review,” Recent Adv. Technol. Accept. Model. Theor., pp. 389–409, 2021.
22. I. Shahin, A. B. Nassif, A. Elnagar, S. Gamal, S. A. Salloum, and A. Aburayya, “Neurofeedback

interventions for speech and language impairment: A systematic review,” J. Manag. Inf.
Decis. Sci., vol. 24, pp. 1–30, 2021.

23. S. K. Areed S., Salloum S.A., “The Role of Knowledge Management Processes for
Enhancing and Supporting Innovative Organizations: A Systematic Review.,” Al-Emran M.,

Shaalan K., Hassanien A. Recent Adv. Intell. Syst. Smart Appl. Stud. Syst. Decis. Control. vol
295. Springer, Cham, 2021.
24. S. K. Al Mansoori S., Salloum S.A., “The Impact of Artificial Intelligence and Information
Technologies on the Efficiency of Knowledge Management at Modern Organizations: A
Systematic Review.,” Al-Emran M., Shaalan K., Hassanien A. Recent Adv. Intell. Syst. Smart
Appl. Stud. Syst. Decis. Control. vol 295. Springer, Cham, 2021.
25. A. Alshamsi, M. Alshurideh, B. A. Kurdi, and S. A. Salloum, The Influence of Service Quality
on Customer Retention: A Systematic Review in the Higher Education, vol. 1261 AISC.
2021.
26. S. K. Yousuf H., Lahzi M., Salloum S.A., “Systematic Review on Fully Homomorphic
Encryption Scheme and Its Application.,” Al-Emran M., Shaalan K., Hassanien A. Recent
Adv. Intell. Syst. Smart Appl. Stud. Syst. Decis. Control. vol 295. Springer, Cham, 2021.
27. R. ALBayari, S. Abdullah, and S. A. Salloum, “Cyberbullying Classification Methods for
Arabic: A Systematic Review,” in The International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and
Computer Vision, 2021, pp. 375–385.
28. S. Hantoobi, A. Wahdan, S. A. Salloum, and K. Shaalan, “Integration of Knowledge

Management in a Virtual Learning Environment: A Systematic Review,” Recent Adv.
Technol. Accept. Model. Theor., pp. 247–272, 2021.
29. A. Wahdan, S. Hantoobi, S. A. Salloum, and K. Shaalan, “The role of knowledge
management in virtual learning environments: a systematic review,” Int. J. Knowl. Manag.
Stud., vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 325–351, 2021.
30. F. Almatrooshi, S. Alhammadi, S. A. Salloum, and K. Shaalan, “Text and web content mining:
a systematic review,” in International Conference on Emerging Technologies and
Intelligent Systems, 2021, pp. 79–87.
31. A. A. A. Mehrez, M. Alshurideh, B. A. Kurdi, and S. A. Salloum, Internal Factors Affect

Knowledge Management and Firm Performance: A Systematic Review, vol. 1261 AISC.
2021.
32. H. Yousuf, M. Lahzi, S. A. Salloum, and K. Shaalan, “A systematic review on sequence-
tosequence learning with neural network and its models.,” Int. J. Electr. Comput. Eng., vol.
11, no. 3, 2021.

33. S. A. Salloum, “Sentiment Analysis in Dialectal Arabic: A Systematic Review,” Adv. Mach.
Learn. Technol. Appl. Proc. AMLTA 2021, p. 407.
34. M. Taryam et al., "The impact of the covid-19 pandemic on the mental health status of
healthcare providers in the primary health care sector in Dubai", Linguist Antverp., 2021.
35. F. Al Suwaidi, M. Alshurideh, B. Al Kurdi, and S. A. Salloum, The Impact of Innovation
Management in SMEs Performance: A Systematic Review, vol. 1261 AISC. 2021.
36. H. AlShehhi, M. Alshurideh, B. A. Kurdi, and S. A. Salloum, The Impact of Ethical Leadership
on Employees Performance: A Systematic Review, vol. 1261 AISC. 2021.
37. A. Ahmed, M. Alshurideh, B. Al Kurdi, and S. A. Salloum, Digital Transformation and
Organizational Operational Decision Making: A Systematic Review, vol. 1261 AISC. 2021.
38. R. Al-Maroof, N. Al-Qaysi, S. A. Salloum, and M. Al-Emran, “Blended Learning Acceptance:
A Systematic Review of Information Systems Models,” Technol. Knowl. Learn., pp. 1–36,
2021.
39. F. A. Almazrouei, M. Alshurideh, B. Al Kurdi, and S. A. Salloum, “Social Media Impact on
Business: A Systematic Review,” in International Conference on Advanced Intelligent

Systems and Informatics, 2020, pp. 697–707.
40. S. K. Habeh O., Thekrallah F., Salloum S.A., “Knowledge Sharing Challenges and
Solutions Within Software Development Team: A Systematic Review.,” Al-Emran M.,

Shaalan K., Hassanien A. Recent Adv. Intell. Syst. Smart Appl. Stud. Syst. Decis. Control. vol
295. Springer, Cham, 2021.
41. S. K. AlShuweihi M., Salloum S.A., “Biomedical Corpora and Natural Language
Processing on Clinical Text in Languages Other Than English: A Systematic Review.,” AlEmran M.,
Shaalan K., Hassanien A. Recent Adv. Intell. Syst. Smart Appl. Stud. Syst. Decis. Control. vol 295.
Springer, Cham, 2021.
42. A. O. Al Khayyal, M. Alshurideh, B. Al Kurdi, and S. A. Salloum, Women Empowerment in

UAE: A Systematic Review, vol. 1261 AISC. 2021.
43. S. Sokhanvar, J. Matthews, and P. Yarlagadda, “Importance of knowledge management

processes in a project-based organization: A case study of research enterprise,” Procedia
Eng., vol. 97, pp. 1825–1830, 2014.
44. B. Tshuma, H. Steyn, and C. Van Waveren, “The role played by PMOs in the transfer of
knowledge between projects: A conceptual framework,” South African J. Ind. Eng., vol. 29,
no. 2, pp. 127–140, 2018.

45. N. Gomo, H. Steyn, and C. C. van Waveren, “The role of the project management office in
knowledge transfer in a matrix-structured organisation: a case study,” South African J. Ind.
Eng., vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 129–140, 2021.
46. J. L. Cummings and B.-S. Teng, “Transferring R&D knowledge: the key factors affecting
knowledge transfer success,” J. Eng. Technol. Manag., vol. 20, no. 1–2, pp. 39–68, 2003.
47. C. C. van Waveren, L. A. G. Oerlemans, and M. W. Pretorius, “Knowledge transfer in project-
based organizations. A conceptual model for investigating knowledge type, transfer
mechanisms and transfer success,” in 2014 IEEE International Conference on Industrial
Engineering and Engineering Management, 2014, pp. 1176–1181.
48. Knowledge Research Institute, Knowledge transfer processes. Knowledge Resources

Institute, Inc - London., 2000.
49. S. Pemsel and A. Wiewiora, “Project management office a knowledge broker in
projectbased organisations,” Int. J. Proj. Manag., vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 31–42, 2013.
50. H. Steyn, C. C. Van Waveren, and B. Tshuma, “An exploratory case study to validate a
method for investigating the role of PMOs in knowledge transfer,” South African J. Ind.
Eng., vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 143–155, 2020.
51. S. Lee, B. G. Kim, and H. Kim, “An integrated view of knowledge management for
performance,” J. Knowl. Manag., 2012.
52. P. Sarka, P. Heisig, N. H. M. Caldwell, A. M. Maier, and C. Ipsen, “Future research on

information technology in knowledge management,” Knowl. Process Manag., 2019.
53. N. J. Navimipour and Y. Charband, “Knowledge sharing mechanisms and techniques in
project teams: Literature review, classification, and current trends,” Comput. Human
Behav., vol. 62, pp. 730–742, 2016.
54. J. W. Prinsloo, C. C. Van Waveren, and K.-Y. Chan, “Factors that impact knowledge
dissemination in projects,” South African J. Ind. Eng., vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 1–11, 2017.
55. J. Liebowitz and I. Megbolugbe, “A set of frameworks to aid the project manager in
conceptualizing and implementing knowledge management initiatives,” Int. J. Proj.
Manag., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 189–198, 2003.
56. A. Jhamba and H. Steyn, “Knowledge transfer across different boundaries in a project
environment: a case study of a Botswana mining organisation,” South African J. Ind. Eng.,
vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 182–195, 2021.
57. K. C. Desouza and J. R. Evaristo, “Project management offices: A case of knowledgebased
archetypes,” Int. J. Inf. Manage., vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 414–423, 2006.

58. C. X. Dai and W. G. Wells, “An exploration of project management office features and their
relationship to project performance,” Int. J. Proj. Manag., vol. 22, no. 7, pp. 523– 532, 2004.

The Impact of Project Management Offices

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

The Impact of Project Management Offices

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Impact of Project Management Offices

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Vol.

No.12 Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems 1006-5911