English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The comments related to the sustainability of knowledge management (KM) have shown signs that it possibly can be a discourse which determines a quick style, but otherwise have also allowed the building of a better understanding about the limits and weaknesses of the knowlege management. In addition to the criticisms, the conceptual bases of knowledge management have been undermined by a contradictory combination of paradigms; there are also contradictions between the theoretical perspective jubjacent to the knwoledge management and its operationality. As a way of minimizing the possibility that the knowledge management may be turned into an umbrella concept and fail, it is suggested that its approaches embody a more interpretative perspective, taking up the role of an instrument which enables and facilitates the processes and practices in building up knowledge and information, enhancing their focus on the support to the establishment of human competences in order to deal intelligently with the present overcharge of information resources and need for building up information in the organizations.

Knowledge management: uncovering risky gaps underlying the criticisms and moving to another perspective