The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0305-5728.

htm

What are we managing knowledge or information?

Shashi Prabha Singh
Department of Library & Information Science, University of Delhi, Delhi, India
Abstract
Purpose A good amount of literature has appeared on knowledge management, wherein, by and large, the concepts of information and knowledge are being used in an overlapping manner, as are information management and knowledge management. There seems to be a conceptual confusion as to what libraries are managing information or knowledge? This paper proposes to examine this issue. Design/methodology/approach Based on a literature survey and the authors own teaching experience, the article tries to provide an answer to this simple but at the same time complex question. The subject scope is self-explanatory as it deals with two basic aspects, i.e. IM and KM. Findings Based on certain characteristics, efforts have been made to produce a clear distinction between IM and KM. These ndings are also presented in tabular form. Practical implications Today, KM has become an important activity in all organizations, particularly in the corporate sector. As a result, intangible assets are playing the role of key drivers and technology is a key enabler. To be successful in the emerging knowledge economy, new processes, skills, and techniques that help to generate, manage and handle new knowledge need to be developed and practised adequately by information specialists. Originality/value The paper provides a crystallization of ideas to avoid any confusion among students and LIS professionals. Keywords Information management, Knowledge management, Tacit knowledge, Explicit knowledge, Information science Paper type Literature review

What are we managing?

169

Introduction Ever since the dawn of civilization, Indian society has been in transition, in which knowledge and innovation have played signicant role. Agrarian and industrial revolutions played a major role in developing agrarian and industrial societies. Later came an era of information revolution, leading to the emergence of the information society. During this period, there was a manifold increase in information generation activities, and now it is the turn of a technological revolution, which has resulted in the emergence of the knowledge-based society. Knowledge society and knowledge management are the buzzwords of the twenty-rst century, where convergence of communication technologies, computer technology and digital technology are the main partners. This technological explosion has resulted in the emergence of new breeds of resources, forcing us to shift from tangible goods to intangible goods. Due to all these developments, information and knowledge-based activities are dominating and bringing a change in focus towards knowledge management. However, the line of demarcation between information and knowledge management is still very blurred. As a result, both of these terms are being used interchangeably. This situation is posing a serious question for library professionals, i.e. what are we managing, information or knowledge? To answer this question, we will need to dene these basic concepts again.

VINE: The journal of information and knowledge management systems Vol. 37 No. 2, 2007 pp. 169-179 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0305-5728 DOI 10.1108/03055720710759946

VINE 37,2

170

Information The literature reveals an established hierarchical relationship among data, information and knowledge. Data can be dened easily as raw facts, which can be expressed in terms of numbers, symbols, text, images or voice, etc., representing quantities, actions and objects. But it is difcult to dene knowledge and distinguish it from information. Data becomes information when it is put into some context. Information reduces uncertainty or changes ones state of mind. Saint-Onge (2002) denes information as organized data. For Drucker (2001), information means data endowed with relevance and purpose. Gordon et al. (1984) added the dimension of the recipient to the denition, which states information to be the data that has been processed into a form that is meaningful to the recipient. Although, it is such a commonly used word, having so many denitions, it is still difcult to nd a clear distinction between information and knowledge. In the words of Fox (1983):
Information seems to be everywhere. We talk of its being encoded in the genes [. . .] disseminated by media of communication [. . .] exchanged in conversation [every day] [. . .] contained in all sorts of things [. . .] Libraries are overowing with it, institutions are bogged down by it, and people are overloaded with it [. . .] [yet] no one seems to know exactly what information is.

In this denition, if the term information is replaced with knowledge, probably it would look as if knowledge is being dened. Probably this confusion is there because information and knowledge are being used in an overlapping manner. Knowledge Dening knowledge is really difcult, as it incorporates many intangibles such as experience, intuition, judgement, skill and lessons learned, which have the potential to improve actions (Henczel, 2001). Knowledge is a cognitive state of mind, achieved with the coupling of understanding and cognition. It has often been referred to as codied and documented knowledge like patents, databases, manuals, reports, procedures and white papers, etc. Many authors have identied these sources under explicit knowledge, and referred to them as information. Most of the denitions available in various dictionaries are philosophical in nature. According to Davenport and Prusak (1998):
. . . knowledge is a uid mix of framed experience, values, contextual information, and expert insight that provides a framework for evaluating and incorporating new experiences and information. It originates and is applied in the minds of knowers. In organizations, it often becomes embedded not only in documents but also in organizational routines, processes, practices and norms.

According to Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995), knowledge is a true and justied belief. Machlup (1983), in his denition, tried to make a distinction between information and knowledge when he stated that information is acquired by being told, whereas knowledge can be acquired by thinking. He further states that information implies transfer, whereas knowledge is a state (knowing). For Hayes (1993), Knowledge is internal; it cannot be received but must be internally created. Al-Hawamdeh (2003), gave another interesting explanation: knowledge is knowledge till it resides in the minds of people; once it is outside the human mind, it is information. It can be personal

or collective. To add further clarity, knowledge has been categorized into two types, outlined below. Explicit knowledge Explicit knowledge can be easily expressed, articulated or encoded (codied), gathered, organized, transferred or shared with others through social interaction. Examples of such knowledge are trade secrets, standards, patents, manuals, online database, drawings, photographs, etc. The ability to organize and manage explicit knowledge has a great impact on the other types of knowledge that are normally complex and associated with people. Sullivan (1998) discusses an organizations explicit knowledge that takes the form of intellectual assets, which he denes as:
. . . the codied, tangible, or physical descriptions of specic knowledge to which a company can assert ownership rights. Any piece of knowledge that becomes dened, usually by being written down or entered into a computer qualies as an intellectual asset and can be protected. Intellectual assets are the source of innovations that the rm commercializes.

What are we managing?

171

Explicit knowledge, being available in the public domain, has also been called public knowledge or information. Tacit knowledge (implicit knowledge) Tacit knowledge is personal, embedded in the minds of people. It is intuitive, contextual, linked to experience and memories, and is difcult to formalize, document and communicate. Such knowledge is difcult to identify, quantify and convert into real value, unless a structured approach is not adopted to manage such knowledge. It is something that we do possess unconsciously and most of the time we are not aware of its existence. Such knowledge is self-acquired through experience, reading, learning, training and interaction. It is different from the knowledge available in written records, as it is hidden in minds and processes in the form of expertise, skills and competencies, normally gained through experience, socialization and interaction with the environment (Al-Hawamdeh, 2003). It also involves all those processes associated with the identication, sharing and creation of the knowledge. An example of tacit knowledge at work would be the reference librarian who on the basis of his/her experience can tell from where to nd the best explanation of conservation and preservation or lexicography. Tacit knowledge is very important in the organizational context, where it is embedded in the systems, processes, tools and techniques that people create by utilizing their experience gained over a long period of time. In corporate sector, it has to be gathered and preserved for furthering the organizations objectives, otherwise a great deal of such knowledge is lost when people leave the organization in search of better job opportunities due to lack of on the job incentives. Conceptual confusion between IM and KM Libraries and information centers are the reservoirs of information/knowledge which is acquired, processed and organized to be used for posterity in all times to come. For many scholars there is not much difference between information and knowledge, so they have used both these terms in an overlapping manner. In the changing perspective, with the convergence of communication technologies and digital technologies, new breeds of resources like internet resources, e-resources, websites,

VINE 37,2

etc., are emerging and forcing us to have a clear explanation of information management (IM) and knowledge management (KM). This requires that both of these concepts must be dened more precisely. Practically speaking, IM deals with the retrieval of recorded/documented (explicit) knowledge or information only, whereas KM is a process through which organizations generate value from their intellectual capital or knowledge-based assets:
Knowledge management (KM) encompasses both the management of information and the management of people. However, knowledge cannot be managed directly only the information about the knowledge possessed by the people in organizations can be managed (Streateld and Wilson, 1999).

172

Thus, KM aims at collecting and distributing knowledge both explicit and tacit. However, to add more clarity on these aspects, further explanations are provided below on IM and KM. Information management (IM) Information management is an interdisciplinary eld that focuses on information as a resource, with greater emphasis on the acquisition and management of external information and to some extent the management of internal records and other documents. Library professionals have been doing IM for a long time, so they are well aware of different tools and techniques of information management. They identify, select, classify, index and abstract the useful information available in books, journals, patents and databases, etc., to make it accessible in standardized forms, to its target audience. IM mainly deals with managing documented and explicit knowledge (i.e. information), which can be easily transferred or shared within or outside the organization. For information managers, accuracy, efciency, timeliness and veracity are the central concerns. Thus, information management is a prerequisite of but only part of knowledge management. Knowledge management (KM) The term KM was rst used by Wiig in 1986, when he wrote one of his rst books on the topic, Knowledge Management Foundations, published in 1993 (Beckman, 1999). The concept of KM has received considerable attention in recent years. It implies the process of transforming information and intellectual assets into enduring value. KM is organization-specic, where the basic concern is the exploitation and development of organizational knowledge assets to further the organizations objectives (Davenport and Prusak, 1998). KM is not about better things, knowing how to do things better. Various authorities have dened this concept. Dimttia and Oder (2001) state that KM is about excavating and organizing knowledge in order to develop a more efcient and protable organization. In the words of Dubey (2003):
. . . knowledge management is the process of capturing organizational collective expertise wherever it resides in databases, on paper, or in peoples head and distributing it to wherever it can help produce the biggest payoffs.

According to Wiig (1999), KM is a systematic, explicit and deliberate building, renewal, and application of knowledge to maximize an organizations knowledge-related effectiveness and returns from its knowledge assets. According

to Sveiby (2001), it is the art of creating value from an organizations intangible assets. Sveiby (2001) adds a new explanation which states that it consists of two tracks: (1) the IT track (management of information) that involves development of information management system; and (2) the people-track (management of people) involving people development, training, learning and managing competencies. For De Long and Fahey (2000), the purpose of KM is to enhance organizational performance by explicitly designing and implementing tools, processes, systems, structures, and cultures to improve the creation, sharing and use of different types of knowledge (human, social, structural) that are critical for decision-making. According to Al-Hawamdeh (2003), KM involves the management of explicit knowledge or information as well as tacit/implicit knowledge, which means KM includes both i.e. IM as well as KM. It requires turning personal knowledge into corporate knowledge that can be widely shared. According to Broadbent (1998):
. . . in general, knowledge management rests on two foundations: utilizing and exploiting the organizations information; and second, the application of peoples competencies, skills, talents, thoughts, ideas, intuitions, commitments, motivations and imaginations.

What are we managing?

173

In the words of Al-Hawamdeh (2003), apart from explicit knowledge (information), KM includes know-how, who-know (customer capacity) and tacit knowledge. While know-how and who-know can be captured and documented as information, tacit knowledge in the form of skill and competencies can only be transferred through socialization and interaction. Townley (2001) dened KM as the set of processes that create and share knowledge across the organization to optimize the judgement in the attainment of missions and goals. Thus, KM is about enhancing the use of organizational knowledge through sound practices of information management and organization learning to gain competitive advantage in decision-making. Key differences between IM and KM In the above sections, various authorities have dened IM and KM. Many more denitions could have been added, but without adding much to their clear distinction. Authorities like Al-Hawamdeh (2003) and Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) have used the term explicit knowledge almost synonymously to information. They agree that knowledge is a much more complex concept as compared to information. However, based on the denitions and explanations given above, efforts have been made to show differences between the two in Table I where explicit knowledge and information have been used synonymously. Need for knowledge management initiatives Today, KM has become an important activity in all fast-moving organizations, particularly in the corporate sector. As a result, there is a universally recognized shift in the value placed on intangible assets and the vital role such assets are playing in the fast-moving knowledge economy of developed as well as of developing countries. To be successful in the emerging knowledge economy, individuals and organizations need to accept and adapt to this dynamic environment where intangible assets play the role of key drivers. New processes and skills that help to generate new knowledge, sharing

VINE 37,2

Information management IM deals with explicit knowledge available in books, journals, patents and databases, etc. It is basically concerned with the objectives like how the order is routed, who has authority to execute it, with whom the order should be placed, etc. In IM, timeliness, accuracy, veracity, speed, cost, security, efciency, space, storage, retrieval, delivery and manipulation of data and information are the issues of central concern IM is concerned with managing the structured and formalized information, which can be easily identied, organized and distributed

Knowledge management

174

Table I. Key differences between IM and KM

KM deals with tacit knowledge that resides in the individuals mind. KM takes a more holistic view like gathering lessons learned, benchmarking the process for best practices, gathering common problems and solutions, etc. In KM creation, innovation, learning, understanding and validation are the core issues. It is basically concerned with critical thinking, sharing of experiences, failures, and best practices KM basically deals with unstructured, informal and hidden knowledge which cannot be easily identied, extracted or managed as it resides in ones mind Information is managed to be used by individual Knowledge is managed to support individual and and institutional users group learning IM is usually not concerned with the actual KM is concerned with the actual process of process of knowledge creation or innovation knowledge creation, innovation, sharing and its utilization for increasing communication among people and within the organization The concept of KM has primarily emerged from IM plays a signicant role in libraries and the corporate sector, where it plays a signicant information centers in focusing on plans and activities, related to the control of and access to role in enhancing the creation and utilization of corporate knowledge the available records IM uses well developed devices and tools for its KM is poorly organized as tacit knowledge is organization, like classication, cataloguing, list difcult to identify and extract of subject headings and thesaurus, etc. In IM, the emphasis is on external and published In KM, the emphasis is on internal (tacit) information/knowledge knowledge residing in the individuals mind. Thus, here the human element is much more important as it plays a key role as the creator, carrier, conveyor, and sharer of knowledge Information management processes are quite KM processes of creation, sharing and codication simple but IT support can be quite helpful of the individuals/corporate knowledge are quite complex, and IT accelerates these processes

of existing experiences and know-how and the efcient utilization of existing assets need to be developed adequately. Today, we are witnessing a paradigm shift in the ways that business is being done: every organization is different, and there is no template that can be uniformly applied to all, not even to companies operating in the same sector. They all have different objectives, different strategies, approaches and initiatives. Due to these diversities, collaboration and cooperation have become the order of the day to enable organizations to share and utilize the knowledge and expertise of their partners. Under these circumstances, modern communication technologies act as great facilitators to improve and accelerate the ow of information and knowledge. Knowledge management in the electronic era Today in libraries, technology is playing a big role in KM as it provides an excellent opportunity to disseminate and share knowledge. We all agree that technology, as an

enabler, has opened new opportunities for gathering information and providing multiple ways through which vast amounts of knowledge can be shared easily and quickly anywhere, any time. However, everyone agrees that technology is a key enabler in KM, but is not KM in itself. It is a facilitator to provide faster access to knowledge or to share/transfer it among individuals. The application of IT has enhanced the scope of knowledge, the speed of its acquisition, and the ability to store, access, manipulate and use it in a variety of ways at a much reduced cost. Its application has provided the ability to improve communication between people and stimulate cooperation and collaboration. Advances in ICTs, the evolution of the internet/intranets/extranets, and increasing speed of information and knowledge-based activities have given new meaning to knowledge-sharing activities in all kinds of organizations around the world (Luen and Al-Hawamdeh, 2001). In addition, identied expert networks are great facilitators of knowledge creation and innovation. There is no doubt that IT is an asset to knowledge management at such a dynamic time when knowledge knows no bounds, and exchange and sharing have become essential components of the corporate knowledge culture. Tools like e-mail, intranets, groupware, and discussion boards are playing very signicant role in the instant transfer and sharing of knowledge among individuals and organizations. Knowledge-based assets and problems The economy of any country is directly related to its knowledge-based assets, where survival is directly related to the creation and conservation of knowledge. But, due to the lack of a sharing culture and facilitation, the best processes and practices of an organization are not captured in the organizations knowledge pool. The dictum our people are our main asset is a familiar statement that emphasizes the value of people in an organization, and highlights the importance of knowledge that resides in the minds of people. E-mail, groupware, chat and instant messaging are helping to disseminate tacit knowledge, but identifying tacit knowledge in the rst place is a serious problem for most organizations (Sachan, 2002). Moreover, tacit knowledge available in an individuals mind is also lost if it is not captured in a timely fashion or if knowledge workers leave the organization due to lack of job satisfaction, promotional avenues or any other reason. However, according to Grant (2000), the basic problem with such assets is that what knowledge management offers to us is insight into aspects of management that we have failed to understand properly because of our failure to consider the nature and characteristics of knowledge. Information professionals as knowledge managers Traditionally, the role of an information professional was to manage and provide access to written or recorded information available in publications, documents, audio-visual materials, and so on. This required management of the organizations explicit knowledge. The focus was primarily limited to information acquisition, processing, retrieval and dissemination, but that does not mean that information professionals were not associated with KM or contributed to knowledge-sharing activities in the past. They were responsible for managing information and knowledge, but in a different way. Now, in the information- and knowledge-based society,

What are we managing?

175

VINE 37,2

176

information professionals are expected to be more dynamic and competent to deal with the inux of information and to manage organizational information resources and intellectual assets. They can certainly play an important role in promoting the knowledge creation process by facilitating knowledge sharing and providing access to knowledge resources as and when they are needed. For this, information professionals need to develop highly dynamic knowledge management skills and strategies. They should have a clear understanding of various knowledge management processes such as knowledge creation, capture, retention, transfer and sharing, in addition to having the analytical ability to identify and leverage existing knowledge. Shanhong (2000) tried to dene the role of KM in libraries, and according to him: . human resource management is the core of knowledge management in libraries; . the objectives of knowledge management in libraries is to promote knowledge innovation; . information technology is a tool for knowledge management in libraries; and . KM improves customer services and efciency by streamlining the response time. Skills and competencies for knowledge professionals In the current technological environment, libraries are passing through a challenging phase, which is posing serious threats to LIS professionals. Therefore, they need to invent and adopt innovative ways to survive in this dynamic and competitive environment. LIS professionals should equip themselves with new skills and competencies to remain relevant in the mainstream of the twenty-rst century, particularly when users are imbibing the ability to access internet resources themselves to nd their information without entering the four walls of the library. This requires LIS professionals to pay greater attention to updating their skills to be competent to handle the emerging tools and techniques. In addition, they must recognize that best results can be achieved by focusing on people-to-people interaction, working in a multidisciplinary team, and sharing knowledge and experience to achieve the best collective results. This can result in the creation of a cordial environment (formal or informal) and regular communication with other colleagues within the group to learn new things. LIS professionals should develop themselves in such a way that they can contribute to organizational productivity and prots. This will bring them recognition as active and strategic partners of the organization. For this, they must have strong background in information management skills, skills related to good communication, and an understanding of human behavior and cognitive science. They must update regularly to stay competitive in any information-intensive and highly dynamic market. Meeting users expectations should be the goal. Technological change has ushered in a great many challenges for librarians to face, which require continuous efforts on their part to enhance their abilities to learn, adapt and change by acquiring new skills and competencies. Those who ignore the need to change cannot survive in this constantly changing environment. LIS education and KM A change in the role of information professionals from gatekeeper to content manger is a clear indication of the transition. As a result, many LIS schools around the world

have started to run knowledge management programs to meet the demands of the market. Knowledge management is multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary in nature; therefore, KM education should involve people from different schools such as business, management, and communication, etc. This would provide them with an opportunity to come together and share their experiences and views on this emerging area. In the changing scenario, LIS curricula should be designed so that they essentially equip professionals with the best possible range of mixed skills and competencies to assist their users in locating, ltering, and synthesizing information available anywhere and in any form. Today, there is a greater need to pay serious attention to develop information- and knowledge-sharing skills and ensure that information and knowledge captured is utilized and translated into new products and services. Thus, in order to survive and thrive in an increasingly competitive educational marketplace, it has become essential to re-examine the approach to LIS education by taking into account changes in technology and the shift towards a knowledge economy (Milner, 1998). It is also necessary that knowledge professionals should be distinguished from knowledge workers in terms of their role and competencies. While a knowledge worker is anyone in the organization who deals with knowledge-intensive work, a knowledge professional is someone who can act as a bridge between knowledge workers and decisions-makers. He or she has the necessary skills and competencies to enable them to deal with organizational knowledge and promote knowledge management practices within the organization (Al-Hawamdeh, 2003).

What are we managing?

177

Conclusion Today, knowledge has become the most important asset or resource, which unlike information or data, is not easily identied, understood, classied, shared or measured. It is invisible, intangible and difcult to imitate. Expanding the knowledge base within an organization is not the same as expanding its information base, which is routine and much easier. The world is becoming more and more competitive, and as a result every organization is realizing the importance of information- and knowledge-sharing activities. However, the emergence of communication technologies, digital technologies, and electronic resources such as the internet, the worldwide web and gateways, has been instrumental in making the concept of knowledge management more popular; however, the nature of knowledge management is likely to be ever-changing. Indeed, knowledge management in different organizations may serve different organizational purposes. There is no doubt that information professionals need to develop the capabilities to survive in a knowledge-based society, but at the same time, organizations also need to increase investment and put more effort into ensuring that the information and knowledge available in databases, patents, trade secrets or in the minds of people is fully utilized and translated into products and services that give value to the organization. LIS schools in Western countries have been quite proactive in their approach towards KM. As a result, they have already started knowledge management programs to educate and train LIS professionals. However, in India some LIS schools are also paying attention in this regard, but it is high time that all-round attention was given so as to make the LIS workforce more capable and competent to meet the challenges of this competitive world.

VINE 37,2

178

References Al-Hawamdeh, S. (2003), Knowledge Management, Chandos Publishing, Oxford, p. 18. Beckman, T.J. (1999), The current state of knowledge management, in Liebowitz, J. (Ed.), Knowledge Management Handbook, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 11-122. Broadbent, M. (1998), The phenomenon of knowledge management: what does it mean to the information profession?, Information Outlook, Vol. 2 No. 5, pp. 23-6. Davenport, T. and Prusak, L. (1998), Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, p. 5. De Long, D.W. and Fahey, L. (2000), Diagnosing cultural barriers to knowledge management, Academy of Management Executives, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 113-27. Dimttia, S. and Oder, N. (2001), Knowledge management: hope, hype or harbinger?, Library Journal, Vol. 122 No. 15, pp. 33-5. Drucker, P. (2001), Management Challenges for the 21st Century, Harper Business Press, New York, NY. Dubey, Y.P. (2003), New challenges in information management and e-learning in the age of globalization: issues and opportunities, Library Herald, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 82-9. Fox, C.J. (1983), Information and Misinformation, Greenwood Press, Westport, CT, p. 3. Gordon, B., Davis, M. and Olson, H. (1984), Management Information Systems: Conceptual Foundations, Structure and Development, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. Grant, R. (2000), Shift in the world economy: the drivers of knowledge management in knowledge horizon, in Despres, C. and Chauvel, D. (Eds), Knowledge Horizons, Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, MA, p. 39. Hayes, R. (1993), Measurement of information, Information Processing & Management, Vol. 29, pp. 1-11. Henczel, S. (2001), The information audit as a rst step towards effective knowledge management, Information Outlook, Vol. 5 No. 6, pp. 48-62. Luen, T.W. and Al-Hawamdeh, S. (2001), Knowledge management in the public sector: principles and practices in police work, Journal of Information Science, Vol. 27, pp. 311-18. Machlup, F. (1983), Semantic quirks in studies of information, in Machlup, F. and Manseld, U. (Eds), The Study of Information: Interdisciplinary Messages, Wiley, New York, NY, pp. 644-72. Milner, E. (1998), The train is now leaving . . . the challenges of educating information professionals for the twenty-rst century, Business Information Review, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 243-7. Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995), The Knowledge Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, p. 58. Sachan, D. (2002), Knowledge management: challenges for the information professionals/librarians, paper presented at the MANLIBNET 4th Annual National Convention, National Institute of Financial Management, Faridabad, April 3-5. Saint-Onge, H. (2002), Linking knowledge to strategy, paper presented at the Strategic Planning for KM Conference, Toronto, May 28-29. Shanhong, T. (2000), Knowledge management in libraries in 21st century, Proceedings of the 66th IFLA Council and General Conference, Jerusalem, 13-18 August, available at: www. ia.org/IV/ia66/papers/057-110e.htm Streateld, D. and Wilson, T.D. (1999), Deconstructing knowledge management, ASLIB Proceedings, Vol. 51 No. 3, pp. 67-72.

Sullivan, P.H. (Ed.) (1998), Proting from Intellectual Capital, Wiley, New York, NY, p. 23. Sveiby, K.E. (2001), What is knowledge management?, available at: www.sveiby.com/article/ knowledgemanagement.html (accessed 28 June 2002). Townley, C.T. (2001), Knowledge management and academic libraries, College and Research Libraries, Vol. 62 No. 1, pp. 44-5. Wiig, K.M. (1999), What future knowledge management users may expect?, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 155-65. Further reading Polanyi, M. (1997), in Prusak, L. (Ed.), The Tacit Dimension, Knowledge in Organizations, Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, MA. About the author Shashi Prabha Singh started her career with Delhi University Library in 1978 and served there for almost ten years. She worked as Serials Librarian for three years just before joining as Lecturer in the Department of Library & Information Science, University of Delhi in 1987. Dr Singh became an Associate Professor in 1995 and worked as head of the Department during 1998-2001. She began a second tenure of the headship in December 2004. During the period of her headship, remarkable changes have been made in the department, such as curriculum revision of the BLISc and MLISc courses and the recommencement of the Departments journal, Journal of Library & Information Science. Dr Singh has published two books, Research Methods in Social Science and Special Libraries in the Electronic Environment, and has written over 50 articles for both national and international journals and conference proceedings. Shashi Prabha Singh can be contacted at: Singh_34@yahoo.com

What are we managing?

179

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints