Centralized versus peer-to-peer knowledge management systems

28Citations
Citations of this article
55Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The term knowledge management system (KMS) has been used widely to denote information and communication technologies in support of knowledge management. However, so far investigations about the notion of KMS, their functions and architecture as well as the differences to other types of systems remain on an abstract level. This paper reviews the literature on KMS and distills a number of characteristics concerning the specifics of knowledge to be managed, the platform metaphor, advanced services, KM instruments, supported processes, participants and goals of their application. The paper then presents two ideal architectures for KMS, a centralized and a peer-to-peer architecture, discusses their differences with the help of two example systems and suggests that each of these architectures fits a different type of KM initiative. © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Maier, R., & Hädrich, T. (2006). Centralized versus peer-to-peer knowledge management systems. Knowledge and Process Management, 13(1), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1002/kpm.244

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free