Sharing Knowledge in the Social Media Era: Strengths and
Weaknesses for Knowledge Workers
Kamla Ali Al-Busaidi and Ibtisam Al-Wahaibi
College of Economics & Political Science, Sultan Qaboos University, University Street, Al-Khod, Oman
Keywords: Knowledge Sharing, Social Media, Knowledge Workers.
Abstract: Sharing knowledge is a very critical process for professional knowledge workers as it enables the creation
and accumulation of individual and organizational knowledge. The use of information and communication
technologies (ICT) and social media platforms to boost formal and informal knowledge sharing among
knowledge workers is inevitable, and the recent COVID-19 pandemic has forced digital transformation. This
study aims to examine the strengths and weaknesses of social media platforms for sharing knowledge by
assessing its characteristics from knowledge management (KM) and information security perspectives. Hence,
the study assesses the capability of social media platforms as a KM platform in terms of reach, depth, richness,
aggregation, confidentiality, integrity, and availability. Based on the literature review, the main strengths of
social media platforms are reach, richness, and availability, whereas some weaknesses are related to
confidentiality and depth. The findings of this research can help researchers in this area, and help
organizations and decision-makers set policies for sharing knowledge through social media platforms.
Knowledge workers are the core resource of the
knowledge economy. They are individuals with high
levels of creativity, formal education, and learning,
and apply their analytical and theoretical knowledge
to solving problems in their field of expertise; the
productivity of knowledge workers is the most
valuable asset in the 21st century (Drucker, 1999).
Knowledge has become the key resource and
organizations can gain sustainable advances from
“what it collectively knows, how efficiently it uses
what it knows and how quickly it acquires and uses
new knowledge” (Davenport & Prusak, 2008).
Knowledge sharing is a critical yet challenging
process in knowledge management because it
depends on knowledge workers’ willingness to share
their best practices. The knowledge sharing process
can enhance an organization’s operational and
strategic plans and impact several of its aspects:
employees, customers, business processes, products,
and finance (Becerra-Fernandez et al., 2014).
Information and communications technologies
are critical for knowledge sharing in today’s global
and digital society. The COVID-1 pandemic has
illustrated that ICT is the only option or the most
preferred option for knowledge workers
collaboration and knowledge sharing. Social media
platforms are a booming technology among
knowledge workers. They provide knowledge
workers with several functionalities, including email,
chat, discussion forum tools, content management,
document management, search functionality, and
virtual meetings. The use of social platforms for KM
facilitates sustainability and allows organizations to
manage challenges. The characteristics of social
media platforms, such as collaboration, ease of use,
convenience, effectiveness, and implementation
promote their use for KM for small and medium-sized
organizations (Given et al., 2013). Organizations
utilize social media platforms for relationship
management with customers (Büyüközkan & Ilıcak,
2019) and for e-commerce (Abed et al., 2015). Social
media platforms enable knowledge workers to
strengthen bonds with their co-workers (Yoganathan
et al., 2021), and facilitate employee online learning
and education, improved interactivity (Al-Busaidi et
al., 2017), and employee agility (Pitafi et al., 2020).
However, there is no technology that is without
risk, and according to the literature, social media
platforms include several serious potential threats,
such as security, privacy, personal identity,
information overload, and productivity loss (Al-
Al-Busaidi, K. and Al-Wahaibi, I.
Sharing Knowledge in the Social Media Era: Strengths and Weaknesses for Knowledge Workers.
DOI: 10.5220/0011550400003335
In Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management (IC3K 2022) - Volume 3: KMIS, pages 192-199
ISBN: 978-989-758-614-9; ISSN: 2184-3228
2022 by SCITEPRESS Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
Busaidi et al., 2017; Marchegiani et al., 2020), all of
which might further disrupt already challenging
knowledge sharing in organizations.
To help in outlining the potential opportunities
and threats for sharing knowledge through social
media platforms, this study aims to answer the
research question: what are the strengths and
weaknesses of social media platforms for knowledge
workers? Consequently, this study aims to examine
the characteristics of social media systems (strengths
and weaknesses) from knowledge management and
information security perspectives. IT researchers
adopt SWOT to strategically analyze and understand
an organization’s current status in any IT deployment
(Al-Busaidi, 2014; Phadermrod et al., 2019). SWOT
enables organizations to identify a good fit that
maximizes a firm’s strengths and minimizes its
weaknesses, seizes opportunities, and eliminates
From a knowledge management perspective,
Becerra-Fernandez et al. (2014) indicated that a
knowledge management system should provide
reach, depth, richness, and aggregation. From an
information security perspective, Anderson (2003)
underlined three information system security
dimensions: Confidentiality, Integrity, and
Availability (CIA). Hence, the study assesses the
capability of the social media platform as a KM
platform in terms of reach, depth, richness,
aggregation, confidentiality, integrity and
2.1 Knowledge Workers & Knowledge
Knowledge workers are the core resource and driving
force of the knowledge economy. Knowledge
workers are rapidly becoming the largest single group
in the workforce of every developed country
(Drucker, 1999), and have become an asset for every
organization based on their intellectual capital (Al-
Busaidi & Olfman, 2017; Nezafati et al., 2021). The
term ‘knowledge worker’ is attributed to Peter
Drucker; knowledge workers are individuals with
high levels of creativity, formal education, and
learning, and apply their analytical and theoretical
knowledge to solving problems in their field of
expertise to develop new products or services
(Drucker, 1999). They allow exercising considerable
autonomy and discretion in performing their work
(Viñas-Bardolet et al., 2020). Examples of knowledge
workers include professionals such as teachers,
lawyers, architects, physicians, nurses, engineers, and
scientists (Frick, 2010).
The productivity of knowledge workers is the
most valuable asset of the 21st century (Drucker,
1999). Knowledge has become the key resource and
organizations can gain sustainable advances from
“what it collectively knows, how efficiently it uses
what it knows and how quickly it acquires and uses
new knowledge” (Davenport & Prusak, 2008). A
knowledge worker’s productivity is determined by
the “extent a knowledge worker delivers outputs or
achieves the intended goals of his/her job in a
creative, efficient and effective way within a specific
time period considering his/her own competencies
(knowledge, skills and standard abilities required for
the job)" (Butt et al., 2019, pg. 1771).
Knowledge workers may face several challenges.
KM engagement of knowledge workers is a crucial
challenge for organizations in the twentieth century
(Butt et al., 2019). In order for knowledge workers to
be creative, they must exist as free individuals who
can liberally challenge their knowledge and
imagination (Shin et al., 2021). In terms of
technology use for knowledge workers, three specific
characteristics may “challenge established views on
computer support for office work; diversity of output,
low dependence on filed information and importance
of spatial layout and materials” (Kidd, 1994).
The literature identified several tasks and
activities for knowledge workers in terms of
traditional KM activities/processes. Gold et al. (2001)
KM processes included knowledge acquisition,
knowledge conversion, knowledge application, and
knowledge protection. Some researchers (Alavi &
Leidner, 2001) developed more than one framework
for KM processes; one of these included knowledge
creation, knowledge storage/ retrieval, knowledge
transfer, and knowledge application (Alavi &
Leidner, 2001). According to Becerra-Fernandez et
al. (2014), KM processes include knowledge
discovery, knowledge storage, knowledge sharing,
and knowledge application.
Knowledge sharing is a critical and challenging
process in knowledge management because it
depends on knowledge workers’ willingness to share
their best practices.
Knowledge sharing plays a major role in creating
organizational memory (Davenport & Prusak, 1998;
Becerra-Fernandez et al., 2014; Nezafati et al., 2021).
Knowledge sharing includes subtasks and sub
processes. According to Becerra-Fernandez et al.
(2014), Knowledge sharing process includes
socialization (sharing tacit knowledge) and exchange
Sharing Knowledge in the Social Media Era: Strengths and Weaknesses for Knowledge Workers
(for sharing explicit knowledge). Information and
communication technologies can enhance the
effectiveness and efficiency of the knowledge sharing
process. Several organizational mechanisms and
information and communications technologies (ICT)
can be adopted for knowledge sharing. Mechanisms
such as brainstorming retreats, cooperative projects,
conferences, employee rotation, and technologies
such as video-conferencing, electronic discussion
groups, and email can be used to share tacit
knowledge. Explicit knowledge sharing mechanisms
may include memos, manuals, letters, presentations,
etc., whereas KM technologies may include team
collaboration tools, groupware technologies, and
web-based access to databases. Community of
practice is the basic building block for knowledge
sharing; directories of experts and mapping the flow
of knowledge are critical elements for knowledge
sharing (Davenport & Prusak, 1998; Dalkir, 2017).
Traditional ICT can be used to enhance the
knowledge sharing process, such as communication
and collaboration tools, groupware, databases,
internet technologies, and portals. Current social
media tools for knowledge workers include wikis,
blogs, chats, discussion forums, and several platforms
such as Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, WhatsApp, etc.
(Al-Busaidi, 2014; Al-Busaidi et al., 2017; Pitafi et
al., 2020).
2.2 Social Media Platform for Sharing
Advanced social media tools have brought about
changes in the way people interact, communicate, and
share content, and have attracted global attention due
to their pervasiveness and social impact (Ahmed et
al., 2019). Social media tools include micro blogs,
such as Twitter; personal blogs; word-of-mouth
forums; social networking services (SNS), such as
MySpace and Facebook; and video and picture
sharing applications, such as Flickr and YouTube
(Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). Moreover, mobile apps
such as Skype, WhatsApp, Tango, and Viber - are
used among groups for knowledge sharing.
These types of social media tools are considered
prominent and well-established spaces for creating
knowledge sharing channels, where people are able to
find other individuals with similar interests and share
their thoughts with them (Bilgihan et al., 2016).
The main use of social media among employees
is communication. Social media tools contribute
directly to horizontal and vertical communication
within organizations (Ma et al., 2020). Social media
platforms are also used for internal brand building
(Yoganathan et al., 2021), effectively guiding the
opinions of employees, and involving them in
managerial decision-making processes.
Another use of social media among employees is
for learning purposes; empirical findings show that
the users of social technologies in workplace learning
value the interactivity, peer support, and instant
feedback offered by these tools, and that the more the
employees use social media at work, the more they
learn. In more specific examples, empirical evidence
from case studies showed that wikis were efficient as
corporate tools in informal learning (Milovanović et
al., 2012), mobile Web 2.0 applications were
effective aids for informal learning in the workplace
(Gu et al., 2014), and virtual social environments
were useful in mentoring employees (Hamilton et al.,
2010), enabling team learning, and creating
collaborative learning atmospheres (Bosch-Sijtsema
and Haapamäki, 2014).
This study assesses the strengths and weaknesses of
using social media platforms for sharing knowledge
by examining their characteristics from a KM
perspective (reach, depth, richness, and aggregation)
based on Becerra-Fernandez et al. (2014); this is also
based on an IS security perspective (confidentiality,
integrity, and availability), which was created by
Anderson (2003). From an IS security perspective,
confidentiality, integrity, and availability (CIA) are
essential dimensions according to IS security
researchers (Anderson, 2003; Samonas & Coss,
According to the KM researchers, “one possible
way of systematically viewing the IT is to consider
the capabilities it provides in four important aspects:
reach, depth, richness, and aggregation” (Becerra-
Fernandez et al., 2014; Daft & Lengel, 1986; Evans
& Wurster 1999). Knowledge security and protection
are also critical issues for KM platforms (Gold et al.,
2001; Jennex & Durcikova, 2014).
3.1 Reach of the Social Media Platform
Reach refers to access and connection and the
efficiency of such access (Becerra-Fernandez et al.,
2014). Reach ideally refers to being able to connect
to “anyone, anywhere (Keen, 1991). Reach can also
be considered as the distance data must travel for its
exchange (Bleeker, 2020).
KMIS 2022 - 14th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Systems
One strength of social media is that it increases
the reach of communication (El Ouirdi et al., 2015).
Social media can have a huge impact in reaching
global audiences and providing an open portal to
events unfolding in real-time (Johns, 2019). Social
media facilitates interaction, communication, and
building better and wider connections with co-
workers (Yoganathan et al., 2021). Organizational
members can collaborate and communicate remotely
(Zhang et al., 2020).
For instance, Rowan-Kenyon (2016) indicated
that the strength of social media in higher education
is that it allows professionals to create a community
around a common interest despite the distance
between them. Bizzi (2019) indicated it allows better
communication with customers, traders, social media
sources, and stakeholders. Furthermore, Bertoni
(2012) noted that social media platforms support
young engineers in exploiting the network of
connections of the more experienced engineers.
Hence, social media platforms enhance reach by
enabling vertical and horizontal communication (Ma
et al., 2020) among people within and across
organizational boundaries (Kwayu et al., 2021).
3.2 Depth of the Social Media Platform
Depth refers to the detail and amount of information
that can be effectively communicated over a medium
(Becerra-Fernandez et al., 2014). This dimension
relates to the aspects of bandwidth and customization
(Evans & Wurster, 1999).
In terms of depth of the social media platform for
KM, Allan (2019) indicated that the weakness of KM
in social media is that it does not really allow detailed
knowledge sharing entries. Fernandez (2009)
indicated that the weakness of social media in
libraries is that some have limitations on the amount
of information you can input. In addition, Bertoni
(2012) mentioned that social media platforms do not
sufficiently store and classify knowledge over long
periods of time. In contrast, Al-Busaidi (2014)
indicated that one of the strengths of social media is
information storage capacity.
3.3 Richness of the Social Media
The richness of a medium is based on its ability to:
“(a) provide multiple cues (e.g., body language, facial
expression, tone of voice) simultaneously; (b) provide
quick feedback; (c) personalize messages; and (d) use
natural language to convey subtleties (Daft and
Lengel 1986)” (Becerra-Fernandez et al., 2014, pg.
One strength of social media is that it increases
the richness of communication (El Ouirdi et al.,
2015), and it also offers rich data that facilitate robust
analysis (Keppeler & Papenfuß, 2021). One strength
of KM through social media is that it enables posting
video tutorial walk-throughs of complex tasks on
specialized databases (Allan, 2019).
A social media platform is a rich tool for KM. The
strength of social media related to KM is the ability
to upload documents, images, and content that can be
easily stored, recovered, and disseminated (Narazak
et al., 2020). Social media also enables the recording
and sharing of contextual knowledge (mainly know-
why and know-how), and the capturing and
structuring of conversational knowledge (Bertoni,
2012). In addition, it facilitates both structured and
unstructured knowledge sharing (Grant, 2016).
For instance, in personal branding, Johnson
(2017) indicated that social media enables the use and
sharing of pictures, videos, and image-oriented
illustrations of users and their abilities. In customer
relationship management, Büyüközkan and Ilıcak
(2019) noted social enabled engagement with
customers via a variety of tools on social media, such
as videos, images, and sounds. Furthermore, in
competitive intelligence, Kim et al. (2016) indicated
that the strength of social media is that it is a
significant resource for understanding customer
sentiments and satisfaction, as well as the reputation
of the products/services
Videos enable the communication of body
language and voice tone. Thus, richness is a major
strength of social media platforms.
3.4 Aggregation of the Social Media
IT has significantly enhanced the ability to store and
quickly process information. This enables the
aggregation of large volumes of information drawn
from multiple sources (Becerra-Fernandez et al.,
One of the main strengths of social media
platforms is integration with social media and
collaboration tools, and links to mobile applications
(Al-Busaidi, 2014). The geographic information
system (GIS) information embedded in mobile
devices enables the integration of social messages
with the GIS information (Xu et al., 2016). Users can
share the spatial information in the posted message
(Xu et al., 2016). In addition, another integration
strength of social media usage in knowledge sharing
Sharing Knowledge in the Social Media Era: Strengths and Weaknesses for Knowledge Workers
and business decision-making in organizations is
using tools such as “data visualisation” and the “data
dashboard” (Siti-Nabiha et al., 2021).
3.5 Confidentiality of the Social Media
Confidentiality means that only authorized users can
take advantage of information stored on the computer
(Samonas & Coss, 2014). Researchers (Al-Busaidi,
2014; Chi, 2021) indicated a few weaknesses in social
media platforms: lack of security, safety, and privacy.
Each of these issues underlines the confidentiality
For instance, users can see the interactions
between other users (Yang et al., 2021). Knowledge
leakage is also a major concern in social media
technologies (Bertoni, 2012).
In sharing knowledge in project management,
Hysa and Spalek (2019) indicated one major
confidentiality concern is the disclosure of project
data and confidential information through social
media platforms. Thus, social networking sites can
result in a vulnerability that criminals can exploit to
attack organizations (El Ouirdi et al., 2015).
However, other researchers, such as Chandran
(2016), had different perspectives and indicated that
ensuring a high level of privacy and confidentiality is
a strength of social media platforms. The lack of
users’ knowledge about social media privacy settings
causes the confidentiality breaches and leakage.
3.6 Integrity of the Social Media
Integrity means that information accuracy and
modification (making changes in the stored
information) must be restricted to only authorized
people (Samonas & Coss, 2014). It assures the
accuracy and consistency of the information
(Tausczik & Huang, 2020). Samonas and Coss (2014)
also indicated that modification of the data by
unauthorized users can be conducted without seeing
the information. Research indicated several views on
the information integrity of social media. One
positive issue is the exchange of relevant, useful, and
effective information and knowledge (Fernandez,
2009; Given et al. 2014; Grant, 2016; Hysa & Spalek,
2019; Ma et al., 2020; Yoganathan et al., 2021). One
major strength is that social media facilitates the
creation, editing, and exchange of web-based content
(Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010; Leidner et al., 2018) and
user-generated content (Given et al., 2014).
However, researchers (Al-Busaidi, 2014;
Razmerita et al., 2016) highlighted the issue of
information overload and irrelevance that might
impact information integrity. Venkatesh et al. (2013)
underlined the validity issue that can occur during
data collection and analysis through social media
3.7 Availability of Social Media
Availability means authorized users should be able to
use, refer to, or modify information at any time
(Samonas & Coss, 2014). One of the main strengths
of social media is that it is freely available (Al-
Busaidi, 2014; Fernandez, 2009; Johns, 2019).
For knowledge workers, the accessibility and
availability of social media platforms enables
employees to better cope with challenging or
ambiguous situations (Yoganathan et al., 2021). The
prominence of social media communication can
enhance knowledge exchange and support work
efficiency (Yang et al., 2021). For instance, Chi
(2021) indicated that infrastructure (e.g., good
internet access and modern computers) makes social
media available to facilitate information services
between librarians and university library users.
4.1 Summary
This study aims to examine the capability of social
media platforms as a KM platform in terms of reach,
depth, richness, aggregation, confidentiality,
integrity, and availability. Based on the literature
review, the main reported strengths of social media
platforms for knowledge sharing are reach, richness
and availability, whereas some weaknesses are
related to confidentiality and depth. Aggregation was
also reported to some extent as a strength. The
integrity of social media platforms for knowledge
sharing was also mainly reported as a strength;
however, some concerns were raised about it. Table 1
illustrates these dimensions of the findings.
KMIS 2022 - 14th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Systems
Table 1: Social Media Dimensions for Knowledge Sharing
Dimension Supportin
REACH Strength: Bertoni (2012), El
Ouirdi et al. (2015), Rowan-
Kenyon (2016), Bizzi (2019),
Johns (2019), Ma et al. (2020),
Zhang et al., 2020), Kwayu et
al. (2021). Yoganathan, et al.
Weakness: No supporting
DEPTH Weakness: Fernandez (2009),
Bertoni, (2012), Allan (2019).
Strength: (Al-Busaidi, 2014).
RICHNESS Strength: (Bertoni,(2012), El
Ouirdi et al.(2015),
Grant(2016), Kim et
al.(2016), Johnson (2017),
Allan (2019), Büyüközkan
and Ilıcak (2019), Narazak et
al. (2020).
Weakness: No supporting
AGGREGATION Strength: Al-Busaidi (2014),
Xu et al. (2016), Siti-Nabiha et
al. (2021).
Weakness: No supporting
Weakness: Bertoni (2012), El
Ouirdi et al. (2015), Hysa
(2019), Yang et al. (2021).
Strength: Chandran (2016)
INTEGRITY Strength: Fernandez(2009),
Kaplan and Haenlein(2010),
Given et al.(2014),
Grant(2016), Leidner et
al.(2018), Hysa(2019), Ma et
al., (2020), Yoganathan et
Weakness: Al-Busaidi(2014),
Venkatesh et al. (2013),
Razmerita et al.(2016).
Strength: Fernandez(2009),
Al-Busaidi(2014), Chi (2021),
(Yang et al., 2021), Johns
(2019), Yoganathan et
Weakness: No supporting
4.2 Implications
The use of information and communication
technologies to build-human resources is a
prerequisite for the development of a knowledge-
based economy, especially in developing countries.
The COVID-19 pandemic intensified the role of ICT
and social media as key collaboration and knowledge-
sharing tools among knowledge workers. This study
provides implications for researchers by identifying
the strengths and weaknesses of social media
platforms that might lead to potential opportunities
and threats. The literature indicated there are some
potential threats to using social media platforms (Al-
Busaidi et al., 2017; Marchegiani et al., 2020). Hence,
researchers should further investigate each weakness
and the related possible threats. The study also
provides implications for practitioners by providing
insights to help them on setting policies on their
organizational use of social media platforms and in
helping individuals use social media to enhance their
productivity and innovation with manageable threats
and risks.
4.3 Future Directions
This proposed study aims to integrate qualitative
(literature review and interviews) and quantitative
(survey) approaches. A questionnaire will be
developed and a survey will be conducted to
empirically test this proposed framework among
knowledge workers with different profiles and in
different sectors. In addition, a deep investigation on
the different characteristics of different types of social
media platforms is critical as some characteristics
might be different in different social media platforms,
which may impact its utilization for knowledge
sharing by knowledge workers. Furthermore, the
cross-cultural investigation will enrich the findings.
Abed, S. S., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Williams, M. D. (2015).
Social media as a bridge to e-commerce adoption in
SMEs: A systematic literature review. The Marketing
Review, 15(1), 39-57.
Ahmed, Y. A., Ahmad, M. N., Ahmad, N., & Zakaria, N.
H. (2019). Social media for knowledge-sharing: A
systematic literature review. Telematics and
informatics, 37, 72-112.
Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Knowledge
management and knowledge management systems:
Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS
Quarterly, 25(1), 107-136.
Al-Busaidi, K. A. (2014). SWOT of social networking sites
for group work in government organizations. VINE:
The journal of information and knowledge management
systems, 44 (1), 121 – 139.
Al-Busaidi, K. A., Ragsdell, G., & Dawson, R. (2017).
Barriers and benefits of using social networking sites
versus face-to-face meetings for sharing knowledge in
Sharing Knowledge in the Social Media Era: Strengths and Weaknesses for Knowledge Workers
professional societies. Int. J. Bus. Inf. Syst., 25(2), 145-
Allan, C. (2019). Sharing is caring: Using knowledge
management to enhance subject librarian-student
contact. Journal of Business & Finance
Librarianship, 24(3-4), 123-130.
Anderson, J. M. (2003). Why we need a new definition of
information security. Computers & Security, 22(4),
Chandran, D. (2016). Social media and HIV/AIDS:
implications for social work education. Social Work
Education, 35(3), 333-343.
Chi, D. T. P. (2021). Social media in academic libraries: a
swot analysis. Знак: проблемное поле
медиаобразования, 1 (39), 59-67.
Drucker, P. F. (1999). Knowledge-worker productivity:
The biggest challenge. California management review,
41(2), 79-94
Becerra-Fernandez, I., & Sabherwal, R. (2014). Knowledge
management: Systems and processes. Routledge, New
York, NY.
Bertoni, M. (2012). Social Technologies for Cross-
Functional Product Development: SWOT Analysis and
Implications. The 45th Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences, pp. 3918-3927.
Bilgihan, A. (2016). Gen Y customer loyalty in online
shopping: An integrated model of trust, user experience
and branding. Computers in Human Behavior, 61, 103-
Bizzi, L., (2019). The double-edged impact of social media
on online trading: opportunities, threats, and
recommendations for organizations. Business
Horizons, 62(4), 509–519.
Bleeker, A. (2020). Strengthening ICT and knowledge
management capacity in support of the sustainable
development of multi-island Caribbean SIDS, Studies
and Perspectives series-ECLAC Subregional
Headquarters for the Caribbean, No. 81
(LC/TS.2019/115 -LC/CAR/TS.2019/4), Santiago.
Boddy, J., & Dominelli, L. (2017). Social media and social
work: The challenges of a new ethical space. Australian
Social Work, 70(2), 172-184.
Bosch-Sijtsema, P. M., & Haapamäki, J. (2014). Perceived
enablers of 3D virtual environments for virtual team
learning and innovation. Computers in Human
Behavior, 37, 395-401.
Butt, M. A., Nawaz, F., Hussain, S., Sousa, M. J., Wang,
M., Sumbal, M. S., & Shujahat, M. (2019). Individual
knowledge management engagement, knowledge-
worker productivity, and innovation performance in
knowledge-based organizations: the implications for
knowledge processes and knowledge-based systems.
Computational and Mathematical Organization
Theory, 25(3), 336-356.
Büyüközkan, G., & Ilıcak, Ö. (2019). Integrated SWOT
analysis with multiple preference relations. Kybernetes.
48 (3), 451-470.
Daft, R.L. and Lengel, R.H. 1986. Organization
information requirements, media richness, and
structural design. Management Science, 32(5), 554–
Davenport, T. H., & Prusak, L. (1998). Working
knowledge: How organizations manage what they
know. Harvard Business Press, Boston, Mass.
El Ouirdi, A. El Ouirdi, M. Segers, J & Henderickx, E.
(2015). Employees' use of social media technologies: a
methodological and thematic review. Behaviour &
Information Technology, 34:5, 454-464
Evans, P. and Wurster, T.S. 1999. Getting real about virtual
commerce. Harvard Business Review, 77(6), 85–94.
Fernandez, J. (2009). A SWOT analysis for social media in
libraries. Online, 33(5), 35-37
Keppeler, F., & Papenfuß, U. (2021). Employer branding
and recruitment: Social media field experiments
targeting future public employees. Public
Administration Review, 81(4), 763-775.
Frick, D. E. (2010). Motivating the knowledge worker.
Defense Intelligence Agency, Washington Dc.
Given, L. M., Forcier, E., & Rathi, D. (2013). Social media
and community knowledge: An ideal partnership for
non‐profit organizations. Proceedings of the American
Society for Information Science and Technology, 50(1),
Gold, A. H., Malhotra, A., & Segars, A. H. (2001).
Knowledge management: An organizational
capabilities perspective. Journal of management
information systems, 18(1), 185-214.
Grant, S. B. (2016). Classifying emerging knowledge
sharing practices and some insights into antecedents to
social networking: a case in insurance. Journal of
Knowledge Management,20(5), 898-917.
Hamilton, C., Langlois, K., & Watson, H. (2010). Virtual
Speed Mentoring in the Workplace-Current
Approaches to Personal Informal Learning in the
Workplace: A Case Study. International Journal of
Virtual and Personal Learning Environments
(IJVPLE), 1(2), 59-66.
Hysa, B., & Spalek, S. (2019). Opportunities and threats
presented by social media in project management.
Heliyon, 5(4), 1-28.
Jennex, M., & Durcikova, A. (2014). Integrating IS security
with knowledge management: Are we doing enough?
International Journal of Knowledge Management,
10(2), 1-12.
Johns B, (2019). Improve Reproducibility in clinical and
research applications. Stem Cells Translational
Medicine, 8(1), pp 1226–1229.
Johnson, K. M. (2017). The importance of personal
branding in social media: educating students to create
and manage their personal brand. International Journal
of Education and Social Science, 4(1), 21-27
Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world,
unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social
Media. Business horizons
, 53(1), 59-68.
Keen, P. 1991. Shaping the future: Business design through
information technology. Boston: Harvard Business
School Press.
KMIS 2022 - 14th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Systems
Kidd, A. (1994, April). The marks are on the knowledge
worker. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on
Human factors in computing systems (pp. 186-191).
Kim, Y., Dwivedi, R., Zhang, J., & Jeong, S. R. (2016).
Competitive intelligence in social media Twitter:
iPhone 6 vs. Galaxy S5. Online Information Review,
40(1), pp. 42-61.
Kwayu, S., Abubakre, M., & Lal, B. (2021). The influence
of informal social media practices on knowledge
sharing and work processes within organizations.
International Journal of Information Management, 58,
Ma, L., Zhang, X., & Ding, X. (2020). Enterprise social
media usage and knowledge hiding: a motivation theory
perspective. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(9),
Marchegiani, L., Brunetta, F., & Annosi, M. C. (2020).
Faraway, Not So Close: The Conditions That Hindered
Knowledge Sharing and Open Innovation in an Online
Business Social Network. IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management, 69(2), 451-467.
Milovanović, M., Minović, M., Štavljanin, V., Savković,
M., & Starčević, D. (2012). Wiki as a corporate learning
tool: case study for software development company.
Behaviour & Information Technology, 31(8), 767-777.
Narazak R, Silveira Chaves M, Drebes Pedron C, (2020). A
project knowledge management framework grounded
in design science research. The journal of corporate
transformation, 27(3), pp 1-14.
Nezafati, N., Razaghi, S., Moradi, H., Shokouhyar, S., &
Jafari, S. (2021). Promoting knowledge sharing
performance in a knowledge management system: do
knowledge workers’ behavior patterns matter? VINE
Journal of Information and Knowledge Management
Systems. DOI:
Pitafi, A. H., Rasheed, M. I., Kanwal, S., & Ren, M. (2020).
Employee agility and enterprise social media: The Role
of IT proficiency and work expertise. Technology in
Society, 63, 101333.
Razmerita, L., Kirchner, K., & Nielsen, P. (2016). What
factors influence knowledge sharing in organizations?
A social dilemma perspective of social media
communication. Journal of knowledge Management,
20(6), 1225-1246.
Rowan-Kenyon, (2016). Social media in higher education.
Ashe Higher Education Report, 42(5), 7–128.
Samonas, S., & Coss, D. (2014). The CIA strikes back:
Redefining confidentiality, integrity, and availability in
security. Journal of Information System Security, 10(3),
Siti-Nabiha, A. K., Nordin, N., & Poh, B. K. (2021). Social
media usage in business decision-making: the case of
Malaysian small hospitality organisations. Asia-Pacific
Journal of Business Administration, 13(2), pp 272-289
Tausczik, Y., & Huang, X. (2020). Knowledge generation
and sharing in online communities: Current trends and
future directions. Current Opinion in Psychology, 36,
Viñas-Bardolet, C., Torrent-Sellens, J., & Guillen-Royo,
M. (2020). Knowledge workers and job satisfaction:
evidence from Europe. Journal of the Knowledge
Economy, 11(1), 256-280.
Xu, Z., Zhang, H., Hu, C., Mei, L., Xuan, J., Choo, K. K.
R., ... & Zhu, Y. (2016). Building knowledge base of
urban emergency events based on crowdsourcing of
social media. Concurrency and Computation: Practice
and experience, 28(15), 4038-4052.
Yang, X., Lyu, Y., Tian, T., Liu, Y., Liu, Y., & Zhang, X.
(2021, January). Rumor detection on social media with
graph structured adversarial learning. In Proceedings of
the twenty-ninth international conference on
international joint conferences on artificial
intelligence (pp. 1417-1423).
Yoganathan, V., Osburg, V. S., & Bartikowski, B. (2021).
Building better employer brands through employee
social media competence and online social
capital. Psychology & Marketing, 38(3), 524-536.
Zhang, X., Tang, J., Wei, X., Yi, M., & Ordóñez, P. (2020).
How does mobile social media affect knowledge
sharing under the “Guanxi” system? Journal of
Knowledge Management, 24(6), 1343-1367.
Sharing Knowledge in the Social Media Era: Strengths and Weaknesses for Knowledge Workers