p.p1 Uriarte, 2008). In general, there are two

p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 12.0px ‘Times New Roman’; color: #000000; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000}
p.p2 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 12.0px ‘Times New Roman’; color: #000000; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000; min-height: 15.0px}
p.p3 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; text-align: justify; font: 8.0px ‘Times New Roman’; color: #000000; -webkit-text-stroke: #000000}
span.s1 {font-kerning: none}
span.Apple-tab-span {white-space:pre}

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Knowledge is a concept of realising and understanding patterns and implications of existing data and information (Filemon & Uriarte, 2008). In general, there are two types of knowledge : tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge. Tacit knowledge is a knowledge that residing in the human brain and is difficult to articulate into words, text and drawings (Laudon & Laudon, 2014). On the contrary, explicit knowledge is knowledge that is resided in documents, databases, memos and other forms of storage. Primarily, knowledge is known to be one of intangible assets of an organisation (Laudon & Laudon, 2014). In an organisation, knowledge is being generated in gathered through various mechanisms of ‘organisational learning’ such as data collection, experiment and feedback. Organisational learning can be defined as the process of change in which organisations can sustainably improve their utilisation of the accumulated knowledge in response to the turbulent environments (King, 2009). Typically,  oranisatitons are not able to fully make use of the knowledge that they posses. However, through knowledge management (KM), organisations may seek to obtain or generate knowledge that may be useful and to make it readily accessible to those who want to use it.

Knowledge Management (KM) has been revolving around the interest of many disciplines since the last decades (Wiig, 2000). Database technologies, organisational science, decision support system, performance support systems and web technologies are among the disciplines of KM (Dalkir, 2005). Owing to the multidisciplinary nature of KM, the phrase ‘Knowledge Management’ is too complex to be explicated into a universal definition. Nevertheless, to put it simply, the concept of KM is technically involved a cyclical process of creating, capturing, using and sharing knowledge (Filemon & Uriarte, 2008). Nowadays, the management of knowledge has become one of a fundamental factors for the organisational survival and competitive advantage (Jeon et al., 2011; Omotayo, 2015). Fundamentally, there are four key components of KM that is — knowledge, people, technology and process (Desouza, 2011). Nonetheless, the success of an organisation may be subjected by its ability to leverage its knowledge-based assets. 

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 BRIEF HISTORY OF KM
According to the historical perspective of KM, the classical evaluation of KM came into light in the 1970s (Filemon & Uriarte, 2008). The work of Peter Drucker and Paul Strassman highlighted that information and explicit knowledge are considered as valuable assets of an organisation. Whereas, the work of Peter Senge emphasised on the learning organisation and managing knowledge. However, in the late 1970s, Everett Rogers and Thomas Allen laid the basis of understanding on how knowledge is generated, implemented and integrated within the organisation. Although the notion of knowledge as competitive advantage emerged in the 1970s, it was in the mid 1980s that this notion became more and more evident. During this period, Peter Drucker and other writers developed the ideas of managing knowledge that dependent on artificial intelligence and expert systems. These development had brought to the such concept of “knowledge acquisition”, “knowledge based system” and other computer based entities. Consequently, these also led to the further rapid growth of knowledge managing systems. 

Later in the 1990s, a number of large management consulting firms had started to launch in-house knowledge management (KM) initiatives (Filemon & Uriarte, 2008). Moreover, as knowledge management gained attention among corporations and organisations, the number of articles, books and press being published has escalated significantly. In 1994, the International Knowledge Management Network (IKMN) based in Europe went online and shortly after followed by Knowledge Management Forum, United States. Subsequently, numerous other KM-related groups and publications started to make an appearance. By the end of 1990s, knowledge management projects had become big business for major international consulting firms that implemented “knowledge management solutions”. For instances, Ernst & Young, Arthur Andersen, and Booz-Allen & Hamilton. This can be attributed to the failed Total Quality Management (TQM) and other business process initiatives which in turn making knowledge management (KM) a very desirable alternative. 

2.2 EVOLUTIONS OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT (KM)
The evolution of knowledge management (KM) is comprised of two generations. The first generations of KM was predominantly technology driven whereby it mainly involved the process of capturing knowledge. However, the non-fulfillment techniques of the KM first generation had prompted theorists to further investigate the course of action how knowledge is created and shared. Accordingly, the second generation was essentially concerned on people, behaviors and working style instead of focusing on the application of technology. Nevertheless, in the present-time as well as future perspective of KM, the use of technology is becoming evermore indispensable. Nowadays, with the emergence of smart technology may exerts a great influence on how we work, learn and interact. John Bordeaux, an associate partner of IBM Global Business Services in Social Knowledge Management stated that smart technology will affect KM over the next three years and change the way people as well as organisations incorporate technology into the decision-making process. (Trees, 2015). 

3.0 DISCUSSION
Bearing in mind the dynamic nature of knowledge today, knowledge management (KM) has become the focal point and necessity for organisations (Omotayo, 2015). The need for managing knowledge in the organisation can be accounted by various driving factors in the environment. For instances, the effect of globalisation, technological advancement, highly competitive market place as well as aging workforce (Wiig, 2000; Dalkir, 2005; Omotayo, 2015). According to Ridge (2007), organisations that can effectively manage and leverage their knowledge are more likely to perform better. In addition, the knowledge management (KM) plays a significant role in governing innovation at the organisational level (Ridge, 2007; Du Plessis, 2007). For instance, by encouraging open innovation culture through sharing knowledge and work collaboration among employees as well as other external parties to develop new ideas. Through innovation, organisation will able to differentiate itself from its competitors and will help to (Desouza, 2011). Based on study conducted by Forbes in 2004, Fortune 500 companies suffered financial loss  amounted to $31.5 Billion a year by failing to share knowledge (Babcock, 2004). 

At the management and individual level, people often engage with decision-making process on a daily basis. Therefore, the successfulness of the organisation may be dependent upon the competencies of the managers and employees in making decision and solve problem. Moon and Desouza (2011) stated that managers will have a better chance in making decisions when there is more accurate knowledge available. Consequently, KM is often described as a strategic management tool for organisation in managing collective information of employees’ expertise (Martensson, 2000). In order to create and implement KM as a strategic tool in the organisation, it is extremely crucial to align the KM strategy with the organisation mission, goals, and objectives (Gao et. al, 2008; Oluikpe, 2012). Furthermore, the successful organisation’s implementation of KM is also associated to culture and people as people is  essentially the source of knowledge (Oluikpe, 2012; Hislop, 2013)

4.0 CONCLUSION
In essence, knowledge management (KM) can provide privileges to the organisation such as efficient decision making process, competitive edge and survival. Nevertheless, implementing it successfully may be a challenge and often associated with countless failures for many organisations. Therefore, implementing knowledge management (KM) may not always be essential for all organisations. In fact, adequate management support, particularly from the top level management is required in order to acheive great success in implementing KM in the organisations (Mayo, 1998 ; Pettersson, 2009).