知識就是力量，是企業創造競爭力最重要的部份。從整個歷史來看，知識獲得和知識再利用永遠是企業成功的鎖鑰。雖然知識管理系統和基礎設施都已就緒且非常有效，但要滿足我們對知識領域的其他需求，我們卻必須摒棄對資訊科技的仰賴。即使再好的電子資料庫，也必需依賴人來輸入資料。目前是將注意力重新轉移到人本身的時候了，由人自己掌控的機制，人的頭腦才是最強而有力且存量浩瀚的資料庫。我們必須培養、指導、鼓勵並且訓練我們的頭腦，才能發揮令人驚訝的個人潛能。
本研究的主題是探索Markus學者（2001）所提出的知識再利用初期理論，它著重於知識管理系統對知識管理的重要性，而不是創造或使用的個人。本研究著重於個人，並且為未來實證研究發展出一個概念性架構。在這架構中，有七項因數：知識提供者的特性、知識再利用者的特性、中間人扮演的角色、社會臨場感、知識品質、文件品質、和組織因素，全都會影響知識再利用的意願。目前改善知識再利用最明顯的四項人為因素是：1. 知識提供者要能夠將內隱知識以最明顯的方式來表達; 2. 中間人不僅能夠充分瞭解資料來源的重要內容，也會協助將文件的格式最佳化，以適合其他再利用者再利用; 3. 從知識再利用者回饋的程度，和知識提供者與中間人對回饋接受的意願，會隨知識再利用的需求不斷改變而調適。4.社會臨場感會加強再利用者內隱知識的獲得，對知識再利用的意願產生重大的影響。

Knowledge is power, and in business, an essential part in creating a competitive edge. Throughout history, the acquisition and reuse of knowledge has always been the key to success. Today, the systems and infrastructure for knowledge reuse are in place and very effective, but we must abandon the reliance on technology to answer all our remaining needs in this area. Computer databases are only as good as the individuals who enter the data. It's time to refocus on the human, natures own mechanism, which holds in it, perhaps the most powerful and vast of all database systems, the brain. We must nurture, guide, encourage, and train it to fulfill its own amazing potential.
The theme of this research is to explore Markus’ (2001) nascent theory of knowledge reuse, which focuses on the greater importance of the system, rather than the individual. This research focuses on the individual, and a conceptual framework is developed for future empirical research. Within this framework, there are seven factors: characteristics of knowledge producers and re-users, the role of human intermediaries, social presence, knowledge quality, document quality, and organization factors all of which affect the intention of knowledge reuse.
There are four human factors which stand at the forefront of improving knowledge reuse today: 1. The knowledge provider who can express tacit knowledge in the most explicit manner; 2. The intermediary who can not only grasp the importance contained within the source material, but anticipate how best to format it so it will be useful to a wide variety of re-users; 3. The level of feedback from re-user, and the willingness of providers and intermediaries to accept this feedback, and adapt to the ever-changing needs of the re-user; and 4. Social presence enhances the ability to obtain tacit knowledge and has a positive affect for strong intention of reuse.

Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………………i
Chinese and English Summary…………………………………………………….….ii
Abstract…………………………………………………………………………….....iii
Chinese Abstract……………………………………………………………………...iv
List of Figures……………………………………………………………………... ..vii
List of Tables………………………………………………………………………...viii
1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………………1
1.1 Background…………………………………………………………………... 3
1.2 Research Motivation and Objectives………………………………………….3
1.3 Research Processes and Procedures…………………………………………...4
1.4 Organization of This Thesis…………………………………………………...5
2. Literature Review…………………………………………………………………...6
2.1 Relevant Knowledge Management Concepts………………………………….6
2.1.1 Data, Information and Knowledge…………………………………...….6
2.1.2 Tacit Knowledge and Explicit Knowledge………………………………6
2.1.3 Knowledge Management………………………………………………...8
2.1.4 The Theory of Knowledge Creation………………………...…………...8
2.1.5 Knowledge Management Strategy……………………………………...11
2.1.6 Knowledge Worker……………………………………………………..14
2.2 The Theory of Knowledge Reuse…………………………………………….17
2.2.1 Definition of Knowledge Reuse………………………………………..17
2.2.2 Types of Knowledge Re-user…………………………………………..26
2.2.3 Knowledge Reuse Process……………………………………………...28
2.2.4 Knowledge Repository (Organizational Memory System)…………….28
2.2.5 Cost of Making and Using Good Repository Records…………………31
2.2.6 Incentive………………………………………………………………..32
2.2.7 The Role of Intermediaries in Knowledge Documenting and Reuse…..34
2.3 The Theory of Social Presence……………………………………………….37
2.3.1 Presence……………………………………………………………...…38
2.3.2 Social Presence…………………………………………………………38
2.4 Successful Knowledge Management Practices in Taiwan…………………...41
2.5 Components for Proposed Case Study Research Designs…………………....42
3. Clarification of Issues Concerning Knowledge Reuse……………..……………...45
3.1 Why Knowledge is Re-used? ..........................................................................45
3.1.1 Limited Resources……………………………………………….……..45
3.1.2 Leverage Created Knowledge for Corporation’s Competitive
Advantage………………………………………………….…………46
3.2 What Are The Issues of Knowledge Reuse? ...................................................47
3.2.1 Information Overload…………………………………………………..47
3.2.2 Different Requirements of Knowledge Re-users……………………....48
3.2.3 Knowledge Re-user May be Unaware of Knowledge Sources………...49
3.2.4 Issues of Motivation and Reward Related to the Knowledge Reuse…...50
3.2.5 Overemphasis on Explicit Knowledge…………………………………51
3.2.6 Neglected Role of Human Intermediaries……………………………...52
3.3 Where Are the Knowledge Reuse Issues Generated? ………....…………….52
3.4 Who? The Roles of Knowledge Reuse ………………………………………53
3.4.1 The Roles of Knowledge Reuse……………………………………......54
3.4.2 Different Motivations of Knowledge Reuse………………….….……..55
3.5 When Do Issues Have The Greatest Effect on Knowledge Reuse? …….…...56
3.6 Major Factors Affecting the Issues of Knowledge Reuse. …….…………….57
3.6.1 Characteristics of Knowledge Providers…………………………….…57
3.6.2 Characteristics of Knowledge Providers Re-users……………..………58
3.6.3 Document Quality…………………..……………………...…………..58
3.6.4 Knowledge Quality………………………………...…………………..58
3.6.5 The Roles of Human Intermediaries…………………………………...60
3.6.6 Organizational Factors…………………………………………………60
3.6.7 Social Presence…..…………………………………………………….61
4. Framework and Propositions………..…………………………………………….62
4.1 Conceptual Framework ……………………………………………………...62
4.2 Propositions ………………………………………………………………….65
5. Recommendations for Further Research ………………………...………….…….72
5.1 Conclusions and Managerial Implications …………………………………..72
5.2 Contributions ………………………………………………………………...78
5.3 Limitations …………………………………………………………………..79
5.4 Recommendations ………………………………………………………...…79
References …………………………………………………………………………...80
Appendix A. Operational Definitions of Research Factors and Measurements……...97
A.1 Characteristics of Knowledge Providers…………………………...…….97
A.2 Characteristics of Knowledge Re-users……………………………..…...97
A.3 The Roles of the Human Intermediaries…………….……………..…….99
A.4 Organizational Factors……………………………………………...……99
A.5 Document Quality………………..………………………………..……..99
A.6 Knowledge Quality………………………………………………….….100
A.7 Social Presence……………………………………………………..…..100
A.8 Knowledge Reuse………………………………………………….....…101
A.9 Hypothesis…………………………………………………………...….105
Appendix B. Questionnaire for Knowledge Reuse…………….………………….. 106

1. Ackerman, M.S. Definitional and contextual issues in organizational and group memories, available from the author's website, p. 10. [Online, Access Date: July, 18, 2005]. http://www.eecs.umich.edu/~ackerm/
2. Alavi, M., and Leidner, D.E. (1999). Knowledge management systems: issues, challenges, and benefits, Communications of AIS, 1(7).
3. Alavi, M., and Leidner, D.E. (2001). Review: Knowledge management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues, MIS Quarterly, 25(1), pp. 107-136.
4. Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in Context: Update to the Social Psychology of Creativity, Westview Press, Boulder, p.317.
5. Argote, L. (1999). Organization Learning: Creating, Retaining, and Transferring knowledge, Norwell, Massachusetts: Kluwer Academics, p. 212.
6. Argyle, M. (1969). Social interaction. New York, Atherton Press.
7. Argyle, M., and Dean, J. (1965). Eye-contact, distance and affiliation, Sociometry, 28, pp. 289–304.
8. Arthur Andersen Business Consulting (2000). Zukai Knowledge Management, Japan, Toyo Keizai Inc., p. 332.
9. Ajzen, I. (2002). Residual effects of past on later behavior: Habituation and reasoned action perspectives. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, pp. 107-122.
10. Balogun, J. & Jenkins, M. (2003). Re-conceiving change management: A knowledge-based perspective. European Management Journal, 21 (2), pp. 247-257.
11. Becerra-Fernandez, I. and Sabherwal, R. (2001). Organizational knowledge management: A contingency perspective, Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), pp. 23-55.
12. Biocca, F., Harms, C., and Burgoon, J. K. (2003). Toward a More Robust Theory and Measure of Social Presence: Review and Suggested Criteria, Presence, 12(5), pp. 456-480.
13. Bowker, G.C. and Star, S.L. (2000) Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences, London: MIT Press, p. 389.
14. Brelade, S. & Harman, C. (2000). Using human resources to put knowledge to work. Knowledge Management Review, 3, pp. 26-29.
15. Brown, J. S., Duguid, P. (1991). Organization learning and communities of practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation, Organization Science, 2, pp. 40-57.
16. Brown, J.S., and Duguid, P. (1998). Organizing knowledge. California Management Review, 40(3), pp. 90-111.
17. Brynjolfsson, Erik (2001). “Strategies for E-Business Success,” MIT Sloan Management Review, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. p. 250.
18. Burn, Janice, et al. (2002). E-Business Strategies for Virtual Organizations (Computer Weekly Professional Series), Butterworth-Heinemann, Woburn, MA, p. 151.
19. Campbell, Donald T. (1975). Degree of freedom and the case study. Comparative Political Studies, 8, pp. 178-193.
20. Chou, Lung Hung (2002). Procedure of Intelligent Knowledge Management System Construction: With the Example of Semiconductor Industry, National Cheng Kung University Management College EMBA Thesis, p. 97.
21. Clark, Kim B. and Fujimoto, Takahiro (1991). Product Development Performance, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. p. 350.
22. Cuddihy, E., and Walters, D. (2000). “Embodied interaction in social virtual environments.” Paper presented at the third international conference of the Association for Computing Machinery on Collaborative virtual environments, Boston, MA.
23. Culnan, M. J. (1983). Chauffeured versus end user access to commercial databases: the effects of task and individual differences. MIS Quarterly, 7(1), pp. 55-65.
24. Culnan, M. J., & Markus, M. L. (1987). ” Information technologies” In Handbook of organizational communication: An interdisciplinary perspective, edited by F. M. L. L. Putnam, Roberts, K. H. and Porter. L. W., Newbury Park, CA., Sage, pp. 420 –443.
25. Cohen, Wesley M., Levinthal, Daniel A. (1990). Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), p. 135.
26. Collison, Chris and Parcell, Geoff (2001). Learning to Fly : Practical Knowledge Management from Leading and Learning Organizations, Capstone, 2nd ed., p. 332.
27. Daft, R. L. and Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design, Management Science, 32(5), pp. 554-571.
28. Davenport, Thomas H., Jarvenpaa, Sirkka L. and Beers, Michael C. (1996). Improving Knowledge Work Processes, Sloan Management Review, Summer, pp. 53-65.
29. Davenport, Thomas H. (1997). Information Ecology: Mastering the Information and Knowledge Environment, Oxford University Press, New York, p. 171.
30. Davenport, Thomas H., and Prusak, L. (1998). Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know, Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge MA, p. 197.
31. Davenport, Thomas H., De long, David W. and Beers, Michael C. (1998). Successful Knowledge Management Projects, Sloan Management Review, winter, pp. 43-57.
32. De Long, D. W. and Fahey, L. (2000). Diagnosing cultural barriers to knowledge management, Academy of Management Executive, 14, pp. 113-128.
33. Deleon, William H. and Mclean Ephraim R. (2003). The Deleon and Mclean Model of Information Systems Success: A Ten-Year Update, Journal of Management of Information Systems, 19(4), pp. 9-30.
34. DeTienne, Kristen Bell, Dyer, Gibb, Hoopes, Charlotte and Harris, Stephen (2004), Toward a Model of Effective Knowledge Management and Directions for Future Research: Culture, Leadership, and CKO’s, Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 10(4), pp. 26-42.
35. Dietel, J. Edwin (2003).RECORDKEEPING INTEGRITY: Assessing Records' Content After Enron, Information Management Journal, 37(3), p. 43.
36. Dove, Rick (1998). The Knowledge Worker, Automotive Manufacturing & Production, 110(6), p. 26-28.
37. Drucker, (1965). Peter Drucker on the Profession of Management, Harvard Business School Publishing, p. 224.
38. Eisenhart, K M. (1989). Building theories from case study research, Academy of Management Review, 14(4), pp. 532-550.
39. Eisenhart, K M. (1989). Building theories from case study research, Longitudinal Field Research Methods. p. 67.
40. Eppler, M. J. and Sukowski, O. (2000). Managing team knowledge: Core processes, tools, and enabling factors. European Management Journal, 18 (3), pp. 334-341.
41. Fischer, William J. (2001). Knowledge Reuse: The Roles of Human and Technical Intermediaries, Master Thesis, Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Georgetown University, p. 120.
42. Fishbein, Martin and Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research, Addison-Wesley, p. 581.
43. Fitz-Enz, Jac (2001). The E-Aligned Enterprise, New York: AMACOM, p. 265.
44. Galliers, D. and Leidner, D. E. (2002). Strategic Information Management, 3rd ed., Burlington, MA., Butterworth- Heinemann, p. 640.
45. Garrison, R., Anderson, T., and Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education, Internet and Higher Education, 11, pp. 1–34. [Online, Access Date: July, 18, 2005]. Available: http://communitiesofinquiry.com/documents/CTinTextEnvFinal.pdf.
46. Garud, Raghu and Kumaraswamy, Arun (2005). Vicious and Virtuous Circles in the Management of Knowledge: The Case of Infosys Technologies, MIS Quarterly, 29(1), pp. 9-33.
47. Galup, Stuart D., Dattero, Ronald, and Hicks, Richard C. (2003). The enterprise knowledge dictionary, Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 1, pp. 95-101.
48. Gibbert M., Jenzowsky, S., Jonczyk, C., Thiel M. and Volpel, Sven (2002). Share Net - the next generation knowledge management in Knowledge Management Case Book, 2nd ed., by Davenport, T., Probst, G.J.B., Pierer, H., Wiley, German, pp. 47-48.
49. Gibson James J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception, Boston, MA., Houghton Mifflin, p. 336.
50. Grant, R. M. (1996). Prospering in dynamically competitive environments: Organizational capabilities as knowledge integration, Organization Science, 7(4) pp. 375-387.
51. Greif, Irene (1998). Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo: CA, p. 793.
52. Grover, V. and Davenport, T.H. (2001). General Perspectives on Knowledge Management: Fostering a Research Agenda, Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), pp. 5-21.
53. Gunawardena, C., and Zittle, F. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing environment, American Journal of Distance Education, 11, pp. 8–26.
54. Gupta, A. K. and Govindarajan, V. (2000a). Knowledge management's social dimension: Lessons from Nucor Steel, Sloan Management Review, 42(1), pp. 71-80.
55. Gupta, A., and Govindarajan, V. (2000b). Knowledge Flows within Multinational Corporations, Strategic Management Journal (21), pp. 473-496.
56. Hahn, J., and Subramanian, M. R. (2000). “A Framework of Knowledge Management Systems: Issues and Challenges for Theory and Practice,” in Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Information Systems, W. J. Orlikowski, S. Ang, P. Weill, H. C. Kramar, and J. I. DeGross (Eds.), Brisbane, Australia, pp. 302-312.
57. Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis, Prentice Hall, NJ, p. 768.
58. Hansen, M. T., Nohria, N., and Tierney, T. (1999). What’s Your Strategy for Managing Knowledge, Harvard Business Review (March-April), pp. 106-116.
59. Hatami, Afsoun, Galliers, Robert D. and Huang Jimmy (2002). Exploring the Impacts of Knowledge (Re) Use and Organizational Memory on the Effectiveness of Strategic Decisions: A Longitudinal Case Study, Proceedings of the 36th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, p. 11.
60. Heath, R., and Bryant, J. (1992). Human communication theory and research: Concepts, contexts, and challenges, 2nd ed., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, p 454.
61. Heery, R. (1996). Resource description: initial recommendations for metadata formats (Ver.1).[Online, Access Date: July, 18, 2005]. Available: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/metadata/desire/recommendations
62. Heeter, C. (1992). Being There: The subjective experience of presence. Presence, 1(2), pp. 262-271. [Online, Access Date: July, 18, 2005]. Available: http://commtechlab.msu.edu/randd/research/beingthere.html.
63. Hertzberg, Frederick (1959). The Motivation to Work, p. 180.
64. Hertzberg, Frederick (1966). Work and the nature of man. Cleveland, Ohio: World
65. Hinds, P.J. & Pfeffer, J. (2003). Why organizations don't “know what they know.” In M. S. Ackerman, V. Pipek and Wulf, V. (eds.) Sharing Expertise: Beyond Knowledge Management, Cambridge, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, pp. 5-26
66. Housel, Thomas and Bell, Arthur H. (2001). Measuring and Managing Knowledge, Taipei, McGraw-Hill, p. 210.
67. Huerta, E., Ryan, T. & Igbaria, M. (2003). A Comprehensive Web-Based Learning Framework: Toward Theoretical Diversity” in Web-Based Education: Learning from Experience. Hershey PA: Information Science Publishing, p. 488.
68. Huang, Jing-Wen (2002). The relationship between knowledge management, human resource management, and business strategy, National Cheng Kung University, Department of Business Administration, Master Thesis, p. 142.
69. IJsselsteijn, W. A. (2002). Elements of a multi-level theory of presence: Phenomenology, mental processing and neural correlates In Proceedings of PRESENCE 2002, Porto, Portugal, pp. 245-259.
70. Jennex, Murray E. and Olfman, Lorne (2005). Assessing Knowledge Management Success/Effectiveness Models, International Journal of Knowledge Management, 1(2), pp. 33-49.
71. Keil, Mark and Johnson, Roy D. (2002). Feedback Channels: Using Social Presence Theory to Compare Voice Mail to E-mail, Journal of Information Systems Education, Vol. 13(4). [Online, Access Date: July, 18, 2005]. Available: http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa4041/is_200201/ai_n9069222.
72. King, R. C., and Xia. W. D. (1999). Media appropriateness: Effects of experience on communication media choice. In Emerging information technologies: Improve decisions, cooperation, and infrastructure, Kendall, E. E (Ed), et al., Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage Publications, pp. 143-175.
73. Kluge, J., Stein, W. & Licht, T. (2001). Knowledge Unplugged: The McKinsey & Company Global Survey on Knowledge Management, Bath, Bath Press, p. 213.
74. Kogut, B. and Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology, Organization Science, 3, pp. 383-397.
75. Kopfman, J. E., and Smith, S. W. (1996). Understanding the Audiences of A Health Communication Campaign: A Discriminant Analysis of Potential Organ Donors Based On Intent To Donate, Journal of Applied Communication, 24, pp.22–49.
76. Kouzes, James M., and Posner, Barry Z. (2003). The Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI): Facilitator's Guide Package, 3rd ed., Jossey-Bass, p. 256
77. Kransdorff, Arnold (1998). Corporate Amnesia: Keeping know-how in the Company, Woburn, MA, Butterworth-Heinemann, p. 194.
78. Le Heron, J., and Sligo, F. (2005). Acquisition of simple and complex knowledge; a knowledge gap perspective. Educational Technology & Society, 8 (2), pp. 190-202.
79. Lee, A. (1991). Integrating Positivist and Interpretive Approaches to Organizational Research, Organization Science, 2(4), pp. 342-365.
80. Leibold, M., Probst, G. and Gibbert, M. (2002). Strategic Management in the Knowledge Economy: New Approaches and Business Applications, Wiley, Germany, p. 351.
81. Lesser, Eric L. (2000). Leveraging Social Capital in Organizations in Knowledge and Social Capital: Foundations and Applications, Woburn, MA., Butterworth-Heinemann, p. 13.
82. Lesser, E.L. & Fontaine, M.A. (2004). “Overcoming Knowledge Barriers with Communities of Practice” in Knowledge Networks: “Innovation Through Communities of Practice” by Paul M. Hildreth. and Chris Kimble (Editors), Hershey, PA., Idea Group Publishing, p. 300.
83. Liang, Ting-Peng (2002a). Theory and Practice of Electronic Commerce, 2 ed., Taipei, Taiwan, Hwa-Tai Publishing Co., pp. 431-489.
84. Liang, Ting-Peng (2002b). Decision Support Systems and Business Intelligence, Taipei, Taiwan, Best-Wise Publishing Co., pp. 7-1 to 7-37
85. Liang, Ting-Peng and Chang, Ling-hsing (2002). The Impact of Knowledge Management on Enterprise. [Online, Access Date: July, 18, 2005]. Available: http://www.cme.org.tw/know/paper/paper15.html.
86. Liebowitz, Jay. (1999). The Knowledge Management Handbook, Boca Raton, FL., CRC Press, p. 700.
87. Liebowitz, Jay. (2002). Knowledge Mapping: An Essential Part of Knowledge Management in Knowledge Mapping and Management by Don White. Hershey, PA, IRM Press, pp. 24-29.
88. Lim, Daniel, Kankanhalli, A. and Raman, K.S. (2004), A Framework for Knowledge Reuse Success, International Conference on Knowledge Management, Singapore, p. 14.
89. Lin, Tungching (2002). Management Information Systems: The strategic core Competence of e-Business, Best-Wise Co., pp. 645-658.
90. Lin, Tungching (2003). Knowledge Management, Taipei, Best-Wise Co., pp. 13.
91. Lombard, M., & Ditton, T. (1997). At the heart of it all: The concept of presence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(2). [Online, Access Date: July, 18, 2005]. Available: http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol3/issue2/lombard.html.
92. Majchrzak, A., Cooper, L.P. and Neece, O.E. (2004). “Knowledge Reuse for Innovation,” Management Science, Vol.50 (2), pp.174-189.
93. Majchrzak, A., Neece, O.E. and Cooper, L.P., (2001a). Knowledge Reuse for Innovation-The Missing Focus in Knowledge Management: Results of a case Analysis at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Paper presented at the Academy of Management 2001, Washington D.C, p. 49.
94. Majchrzak, A., Neece, O. E., & Cooper, L. P., (2001b). Knowledge Reuse for Innovation - The Missing Focus in Knowledge Management: Results of a case analysis at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Paper presented at the Academy of Management 2001, Washington, D.C.
95. Markus, M. Lynne (2001). Toward a Theory of Knowledge Reuse: Types of Knowledge Reuse Situations and Factors in Reuse Success, Journal of Management Information Systems, 18 (1), pp. 57-93.
96. Mehrabian, A. (1967). Orientation and behaviors and nonverbal attitude communication. Journal of communication, 17, pp. 324–332.
97. Moore, M. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction, The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), pp. 1-7.
98. Morgan, S.E. and Miller, J.K. (2002). Communicating about Gifts of Life: The Effect of Knowledge, Attitudes, and Altruism on Behavior and Behavioral Intentions Regarding Organ Donation, Journal of Applied Communication Research, 30(2), pp. 163-178.
99. Neece O.E. (2003). A Strategic Systems Perspective of Organizational Learning: Development of a Process Model Linking Theory and Practice in Managing the Human Side of Information Technology: Challenges and Solutions. Szewczak, E., Hershey. PA. : Idea Group Publishing, p. 187, 217.
100. Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation, Organization Science, 5(1), pp. 14-37.
101. Nonaka, Ikujiro and Takeuchi, Hirotaka (1995). The Knowledge Creating Company, New York, Oxford University Press, p. 304.
102. O'Dell, C. and Grayson, C. J., Jr. (1998). If only we knew what we know: The transfer of internal knowledge and best practice. New York: The Free Press.
103. Oliver, P., Marvell, G. and Teixeira, R. (1985). A Theory of the Critical Mass: Interdependence, Group Heterogeneity and the Production of collective action, American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), pp. 522-566.
104. Olson, Mancur (1965). The Logic of Collective Action: public Goods and the Theory of Groups, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA., p. 190.
105. Orlikowski’s, Wanda J. (1993). Learning from Notes: Organizational Issues in Groupware Implementation, The Information Society, 9, pp. 237-250.
106. Owen, Jill, Burstein, Frada and Mitchill, Steven (2004). Knowledge Reuse and Transfer in a Project Management Environment, Journal of Information Technology Cases and Applications, 6(4), p. 22.
107. Patrick G. and McKeon, Thomson (2003). Learning Information Technology and the Networked Economy, 2ed ed., pp.145-176.
108. Preston, Robert (2002). “Early KM Experiences Challenge Conventional Wisdom.”InternetWeek.com. [Online, Access Date: July, 18, 2005]. Available: http://www.internetweek.com/columns01/rob012901.htm.
109. Pagano, Barbara, Pagano, Elizabeth, and Lundin, Stephen (2004). The Transparency Edge: How Credibility Can Make or Break You in Business, McGraw-Hill, New York, p. 224.
110. Polanyi, Michael (1967). The Tacit Dimension, New York: Anchor Day Books, p.108.
111. Richards, Deborah Christina (1998). The Reuse of Knowledge in Ripple Down Rule Knowledge Based Systems, Dissertation, School of Computer Science and Engineering, The University of New South Wales, p. 4.
112. Robbins, S.P. (1998). Organizational behavior: concepts, controversies and. applications. Canada, Prentice-Hall. [Online, Access Date: July, 18, 2005]. Available: http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-05232002-095013/unrestricted/blsETD.pdf
113. Rowley, J. E., Farrow, J. (2000). Organizing Knowledge: an introduction to managing access to information, 3rd ed. Aldershot, England: Gower, p. 24.
114. Saenz, B. (2002). Student Perceptions of Social Presence and its Value in an Asynchronous Web-based Master’s Instructional Program. Dissertation of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Department of Teaching and Learning. [Online, Access Date: July, 18, 2005]. Available: http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/ available/etd-05232002-095013.
115. Sage, A.P. and Rouse, W.B. (1999). Information systems frontiers in knowledge management, Information Systems Frontiers, 1(3), pp. 205-219.
116. Sambamurthy, V. and Subramani, Mani (2005). Special Issue on Information Technologies and Knowledge Management, MIS Quarterly, 29(1), pp. 1-7.
117. Savicki, V. & Kelley, M. (2000). Computer Mediated Communication, Gender and Group Composition, CyberPsycholgy and Behavior, 3, pp. 817-826.
118. Schneider, M. A. (2002). A stakeholder model of organizational leadership, Organization Science, 12(2), pp. 209-220.
119. Sekaran, Uma (2002). Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach, Wiley, p. 464.
120. Sheridan, T. (1992). Musings on telepresence and virtual presence, Presence, 1(1), 120-126.
121. Short, J., Williams, E. & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. London: John Willey & Sons, Ltd., p. 206.
122. Stein, Eric W. and Zwass, Vladimir (1995). “Actualizing Organizational Memory with Information Systems, Information Systems Research, 6(2), pp. 85-117.
123. Stein, David S. and Wanstreet, Constance E. (2003). Role of Social Presence , Choice of Online or Face-to-Face Group Format, and Satisfaction with Perceived Knowledge Gained in a Distance Learning Environment, Midwest Research to Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education, pp. 193-198.
124. Stevens, L. (2000). Incentives for sharing. Knowledge Management 3, pp. 54-59.
125. Steuer, J. (1995). Defining virtual reality: Dimensions determining telepresence. In F. B. a. M. Levy (Ed.), Communication in the age of virtual reality, Hillsdale, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 33-56.
126. Szulanski, G. (2000). The process of knowledge transfer: A diachronic analysis of stickiness. Organization Behavior Human Decision Processes, 82(1), pp. 9-27.
127. Takeuchi, H. (2001). Toward a universal management concept of knowledge. In I. Nonaka and D. Teece (eds.) Managing Industrial Knowledge, London: SAGE Publications, pp. 315-329.
128. Tiwana, Amrit (2002). The Knowledge Management Toolkit: Orchestrating IT Strategy, and Knowledge Platforms, 2nd ed., New Jersey, Prentice Hall, p. 416.
129. Trevino, L. K., Webster, J., and Stein, E. W. (2000). Making connections: Complementary influences on communication media choices, attitudes, and use, Organization Science, 11(2), pp. 163-182.
130. Tsai, Chen-Chung (2003). Promotion of the global Chinese knowledge management practice, China Productivity Center, p. 428.
131. Tu, C. H. (2002). The measurement of social presence in an online learning environment, International Journal on E-Learning, 1(2), pp. 34-45.
132. Tu., C-H., & McIsaac, M. (2002). The relationship of social presence and interaction in online classes, The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(3), pp. 131-150.
133. Walsh, J. P. and Ungson, G. R. (1991). “Organizational Memory, “Academy of Management Journal, 16(1), pp. 57-91.
134. Wang, Chi-Yo (2003), “Knowledge Management in Philips,” In Promotion of the global Chinese knowledge management practice, edited by Tsai, Chen-Chung, China Productivity Center, pp. 151-179.
135. Wagner, E. D. (1994). In support of a functional definition of interaction, The American Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), pp. 6-29.
136. Watson, Iav (2003). Applying Knowledge Management, San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, pp. 15-17.
137. Watts, D. J. (2003). Six Degrees: The Science of a Connected Age, William Heinemann, London, p. 368.
138. Weiner, M., & Mehrabian, A. (1968). Language within language: Immediacy, a channel in verbal communication, New York, Appleton-Century-Crofts, p. 214.
139. Weise, Richard H. (1996). Representing the Corporation: Strategies for Legal Counsel, Aspen Law & Business Publishers, p. 2200.
140. Wolfe, Christopher R. (2001). Learning and Teaching on the World Wide Web, Academic Press, San Diego, CA. p. 278.
141. Wu, Meishung (1999). “The Study of Relationships between Organizational Memory and Learning Mechanism”, Master Thesis, Department of Business Administration, National Chengchi University, p. 92.
142. Yglesias, K. P. (1993). Information reuse parallels software reuse, IBM Systems Journal, 32(4), pp. 615-620.
143. Yin, Robert K. (2002). Case Study Research: Design and Methods, London, SAGE Publications 3rd ed., p. 200.
144. Zack, Michael H. (1999). Managing Codified Knowledge, Sloan Management Review (summer), pp. 45-58.
145. Zack, Michael H. (2001). “If Managing Knowledge Is the Solution, Then What's the Problem?,” in Knowledge Management and Business Model Innovation, Y. Malhotra (Ed.), Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA, pp. 464.