The Classical precursors of the Theory of Knowledge date back to Protagoras (480-411 BC) who stated that: "Man is the measure of all things, of those that are insofar as they are and of those that are not insofar as they are not.".

To Plato (428-347 BC), who affirmed: "the existence of a world of ideas, invariable and invisible about which it is possible to acquire accurate knowledge."

But it is not until Aristotle (384-322 BC), that knowledge is seen as: "an acquisition via direct means, through abstraction, or indirectly by deducing new data from those already known, through the rules of logic."

These rules were systematically exposed by him, for the first time, as a help to overcome the theoretical traps of the sophists.

Among the medieval founders we can mention philosophers such as Valentine Fromm (1601-1675) with his work Gnosteologia, from 1631, J. Micraelius (1597-1658) with Lexicon philosophicum terminorum pilosophis usitatorum, from 1653 and Geor Gutke (1589-1634) with Habitus primorum principlerum seu intelligentiae, from 1666.

As you can see, knowledge, as a formal theory, is part of the medieval studies of Gnosteology as one of the disciplines into which Metaphysica was divided. For some time, the tendency was to use the word gnoseology, which was used for the first time in the century, in preference to epistemology, then, due to scholastic tendencies, epistemology was used in the general sense of theory of knowledge and epistemology as the discipline that studies the foundations of truth that make knowledge objective, which bases the existence and principle of scientific knowledge, differentiating it from knowledge, as something that It is known without being certain of its veracity.

It is important to note that these ways of using the terms “gnoseology” and “epistemology” to refer to different branches of the study of knowledge have been more frequent in Spanish, Italian, German[note 1]​ and French,[note 2]​ than in English,[note 3]​ which is why in the latter language the words gnoseology and epistemology are used interchangeably. (see Ferrater, 2002: II. p.1470).[11]​.

Currently, the study of knowledge has moved away from the “straight” line of epistemological research, especially in studies with the organizational approach (BA Fuentes, 2010 pp. 104-105.),[1]​ and from this vision Davenport and Prusak (1998: p. 6.)[12]​ point out that knowledge is produced in and between human beings since although a computer can capture and transform data into information, only human beings can convert this data and information into knowledge.

As can be intuited, knowledge is an essential part of the human being and although it has not been able to be defined rigorously, research on the role it plays within organizations and economies has a wide repertoire of consequences in management theory and more broadly in economic theory.

Usually the process involves techniques to capture, organize, and store workers' knowledge, to transform it into intellectual capital that provides benefits and can be shared.

Currently, information technologies provide tools that support knowledge management in companies, supporting the collection, transfer, security and systematic administration of information, along with systems designed to help make the best use of that knowledge.

In detail, it refers to the tools and techniques designed to preserve the availability of information held by dominant individuals and facilitate decision making, as well as reduce risk. It is a software market and an area in consulting practice, related to disciplines such as competitive intelligence. A particular issue of knowledge management is that knowledge cannot be easily encoded in digital form, such as the intuition of dominant individuals that comes with years of experience and being able to recognize the various patterns of behavior that someone with less experience cannot recognize.

The Knowledge Management process, also known in its development phases as "corporate learning" or "organizational learning", has mainly the following objectives:

Knowledge transfer (an aspect of Knowledge Management) has always existed as a process in organizations. Informally through discussions, sessions, reflection meetings, etc., and formally through learning, professional training and training programs. As an emerging business practice, Knowledge Management has seen the introduction of the chief knowledge officer, and the establishment of corporate intranets, wikis, and other knowledge and information technology practices.

Contenido

Los profesionales de la gestión del conocimiento pueden utilizar un léxico específico para explicar la dinámica de la transferencia del conocimiento. Por ejemplo en los diez años pasados, Internet ha visto a grupos establecer discusiones sobre el uso del capital intelectual como valor métrico; el significado tácito contra conocimiento explícito o más.

Intellectual capital proceedings

Management corresponds to the set of processes and systems that allow the intellectual capital of an organization to increase significantly, by managing its problem-solving capabilities efficiently, the way to generate competitive advantages over time.

If we consider ancient markets, the main strength was based on land management, in other words, the person who owned the most land was the one who could generate better products. Let's remember the Middle Ages, the fiefs and the feudal lords. Currently we find ourselves in a society where changes occur at a surprising pace. What is a competitive advantage today will become a market requirement tomorrow.

In the current era, in which maintaining an advantage is almost impossible, organizations must resort to methods that allow them to increase these advantages. One of these advantages is knowledge. Knowledge Management aims to manage this knowledge, making it a competitive advantage over its peers.

Knowledge Management analyzes the existing knowledge in the company from a dynamic perspective. This perspective is complemented by the contributions of intellectual capital literature, which addresses the analysis of knowledge from a dynamic approach.

In the business field, certain companies such as Unión Fenosa, Systematic, Carlo Bro or K3 Technologies LLC, develop and implement knowledge management and intellectual capital measurement programs.

According to the authors Aportela and Ponjuán in every organization there must be two types of strategy:

And according to the authors McElroy and Firestone, strategies are a type of knowledge and in themselves constitute a result of Knowledge Processing (McElroy and Firestone, 2000 in Aportela and Ponjuán, 2008). What this suggests to us is that one of its purposes of knowledge management is to increase the processing of information and knowledge, this information processing is prior to the generation of strategies or knowledge. These two authors also mention that it is important to align the organization's strategies, they must be aligned with the knowledge management strategies, this in order to assign a value to the company's strategy that may or may not be objective.

One of the important strategies that must be considered in organizations is the ability of their individuals and groups to process information, learn and adapt to develop knowledge and be able to apply it in their environment. This becomes a fundamental strategy for the development of any organization, which will allow it to continue, survive, develop and innovate, what Aportela and Ponjuán call "sustainable innovation."

McElroy and Firestone have designed a structure for knowledge management strategies, which covers both the supply dimension, the demand dimension, and both in Knowledge Processing, related to the types of interventions that could be carried out (McElroy and Firestone, 2000). This strategy presents us with a matrix to determine the actions according to the processing of information and the type of interventions. According to these authors, the interventions can be:

La gestión del conocimiento intenta poner de relieve la ventaja competitiva que se da con el mejoramiento o el aprendizaje más rápido y crear nuevo conocimiento. El interés en la gestión del conocimiento se está conduciendo en parte por:.

Connectivity speed

Since its adoption by the business community and the population, the Internet has led to an increase in creative collaboration, learning and research, electronic commerce, and immediate information. With improved technologies, gone are the days of dusty shelves, imperfect or distorted messages, and slow mail. In many respects, the practice of knowledge management will continue to develop with the growth in the uses of collaboration made available by information technologies and through the Internet.

Online education, online discussions, and collaboration software are examples of knowledge management uses that support your process. Each use can expand the level of research available to an employee, while providing a platform to achieve specific goals or actions.

According to McElroy (Knowledge is produced in social systems, through people and the sharing process that occurs regularly between them. This process at an organizational level can be described by the so-called 'Knowledge Life Cycle' (CVC), which does not constitute a model, but rather a scheme that allows the different models to be placed in context. A large part of the actions carried out are designed to influence it, otherwise it is not Knowledge Management. The CVC begins with the detection of problems in the context of Organizational Processing: while people are busy developing organizational processes, they experience certain gaps in their knowledge of how to achieve a certain action or objective. It ends, with the choice of newly validated knowledge requests, beliefs and belief predispositions in the Distributed Organizational Knowledge Base** (BCOD) and its supports. The use of knowledge that follows occurs within the context of Organizational Processing and not Knowledge Processing; that new conflicts arise and are detected.

The main stages of the knowledge management process are storing, collecting, structuring, sharing, controlling, generating, distributing, encoding, using and exploiting.[14]​.

According to King, knowledge management presents a cycle for its best processing. The first step that King proposes has two aspects: Creation is the first, which refers to socializing, externalizing and reflecting on knowledge, either to generate new knowledge of the organization or replace existing knowledge. The second aspect is Acquisition, this involves searching, locating the source of the problem or knowledge, or grafting external knowledge.

The next step in the cycle has to do with the refinement of knowledge, in which it is explained, adapted, organized and standardized, evaluated and analyzed, which must be preserved and documented. This process marks the link with the next step, which is memory, that is, the part where the organization's knowledge repositories are formed.

After memory comes the process of sharing or transferring knowledge. When we talk about sharing it is just making knowledge available to anyone; On the other hand, when it refers to transfer, it is that the knowledge is transmitted directly to a specific collaborator. This is to get to the part of the use of knowledge in the organization, which can be used to elaborate and generate innovation, individual knowledge, collaborative problem solving, or reuse knowledge.

The last part of the process has to do with the performance of the organization, how knowledge management affects the development and management of the organization, to start the cycle again if necessary and as many times as required.

Model of the four phases of Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995)[16]​[17]​

This model contemplates that the generation of knowledge is based on the exchange of information and the constant interaction between types of knowledge (tacit and explicit):.

It conceives knowledge management as a process of interaction between tacit and explicit knowledge that has a dynamic and continuous nature (Bueno, 1999).[18] many organizations apply it even without having it in mind. The fundamental factors that must be considered by the organization are the mission, vision and values. The systematization, standardization and storage of knowledge, as well as facilitating access to it, is essential for the application of this model and any other in higher education institutions. A correct strategy to apply this model is to write down everything that is done, whether representative or not, and publish it in a language common to the organization (explicit knowledge). Part of the knowledge is not codifiable, it will always be in people's heads in the form of experiences (tacit knowledge), to access this, appropriate channels must be established between all the elements that make up the organization.

Arthur Andersen Model (1999)[19]​

The fundamental objective of this model is to identify where opportunities and strengths lie in terms of knowledge management. It is based on the fact that within an organization there are 4 sources that influence the administration of knowledge:

The application of this model in an organization or institution must take into consideration certain elements for the correct application of this model:

This is a slightly more recent model, it recognizes the need to accelerate the flow of information that has value. Highly valued information flows in the company-people and people-company sense, so that they can use it to create value. It emphasizes the personal responsibility of sharing and making knowledge explicit for the institution. It invites you to create the processes, culture, technology and systems that allow knowledge to be captured, analyzed, synthesized, applied, valued and distributed.[20]​.

Data mining (also called data extraction), is the practice (by automatic or semi-automatic means) of searching and exploring large stores of data resulting in the discovery of meaningful patterns and rules. To do this, data mining uses statistical computing, knowledge automation, and pattern recognition techniques (see single-source data systems, information resources Inc.).

La memoria corporativa") (corporate memory) se puede definir como el cuerpo total de los datos, de la información y de los conocimientos requeridos para dar a conocer los objetivos estratégicos de una organización. Una memoria corporativa es la combinación de un depósito (el espacio donde se almacenan los objetos y los artefactos), y la comunidad (la gente que interactúa con esos objetos para aprender, tomar decisiones, y entender el contexto).

La memoria corporativa se puede subdividir en los siguientes tipos:.

Las decisiones clave a tomar cuando exploramos la Memoria Corporativa son:.

Los términos alternativos y relacionados son: memoria de organización, memoria del grupo, base de conocimiento, depósito del conocimiento.

La mayoría de los esfuerzos comerciales de la administración del conocimiento han incluido la construcción de una cierta forma de memoria corporativa para capturar destreza, para apresurar el aprendizaje, para ayudar a la organización a recordar, para registrar el análisis razonado de la decisión, logros del documento o para aprender de las últimas fallas.

Distributed Organizational Knowledge Base/Knowledge Repositories

According to researchers from the Institute of Scientific and Technological Information of Havana, Cuba, Ivett María Apartela Rodríguez and Gloria Ponjuán Dante, "the combination of subjective and objective knowledge in an organization can be conceived as its Distributed Organizational Knowledge Base", which encompasses all knowledge results, including the informative summaries about them.

In their article titled "The Second Generation of Knowledge Management: a new approach to knowledge management",[21] both authors affirm that the Distributed Organizational Knowledge Base is manifested through the so-called "knowledge repositories", which are made up of managers (individual or group) and objects (documents, programs, etc.). They clarify that the knowledge of the managers is subjective knowledge; while that embodied in objects is objective knowledge.

Knowledge repositories, they explain, serve as a basis for discovering and mapping knowledge and are responsible for preserving and reflecting the knowledge requests produced in the Knowledge Life Cycles. They are the interface between the results of Knowledge Processing (BCOD) and which people make decisions and perform actions during the execution of their work.

In a GC architecture we find different tools and services that configure a complete GC solution as a final result.

As tools that support KM within companies, we can differentiate 3 groups or sets:

Other knowledge management strategies include:

The authors Aportela and Ponjuán define "Social Innovation Capital refers to the social capacity of an organization to innovate, produce and integrate new knowledge, as a component of its values. It constitutes the most valuable form of Intellectual Capital, since it is the only one whose purpose is the creation of the remaining forms of Intellectual Capital, including itself."[13]​.

The purpose of Knowledge Management (KM), as Aportela and Ponjuán explain to us in their definition of Social Innovation Capital, is to create products that generate new value, such as:

Similarly, Aportela and Porjuán describe the Second Generation of KM, with its vision of Knowledge Processing as a social process in itself, can speak in coherent terms about the value of Knowledge Production and Integration as an important aspect to consider in the calculation of the values ​​of Intellectual Capital in an entity. Currently, intellectual capital measurement and reporting schemes that do not take into account Social Innovation Capital and do not explicitly reflect the economic value of CVC are incomplete"[13]​.

The Classical precursors of the Theory of Knowledge date back to Protagoras (480-411 BC) who stated that: "Man is the measure of all things, of those that are insofar as they are and of those that are not insofar as they are not.".

To Plato (428-347 BC), who affirmed: "the existence of a world of ideas, invariable and invisible about which it is possible to acquire accurate knowledge."

But it is not until Aristotle (384-322 BC), that knowledge is seen as: "an acquisition via direct means, through abstraction, or indirectly by deducing new data from those already known, through the rules of logic."

These rules were systematically exposed by him, for the first time, as a help to overcome the theoretical traps of the sophists.

Among the medieval founders we can mention philosophers such as Valentine Fromm (1601-1675) with his work Gnosteologia, from 1631, J. Micraelius (1597-1658) with Lexicon philosophicum terminorum pilosophis usitatorum, from 1653 and Geor Gutke (1589-1634) with Habitus primorum principlerum seu intelligentiae, from 1666.

As you can see, knowledge, as a formal theory, is part of the medieval studies of Gnosteology as one of the disciplines into which Metaphysica was divided. For some time, the tendency was to use the word gnoseology, which was used for the first time in the century, in preference to epistemology, then, due to scholastic tendencies, epistemology was used in the general sense of theory of knowledge and epistemology as the discipline that studies the foundations of truth that make knowledge objective, which bases the existence and principle of scientific knowledge, differentiating it from knowledge, as something that It is known without being certain of its veracity.

It is important to note that these ways of using the terms “gnoseology” and “epistemology” to refer to different branches of the study of knowledge have been more frequent in Spanish, Italian, German[note 1]​ and French,[note 2]​ than in English,[note 3]​ which is why in the latter language the words gnoseology and epistemology are used interchangeably. (see Ferrater, 2002: II. p.1470).[11]​.

Currently, the study of knowledge has moved away from the “straight” line of epistemological research, especially in studies with the organizational approach (BA Fuentes, 2010 pp. 104-105.),[1]​ and from this vision Davenport and Prusak (1998: p. 6.)[12]​ point out that knowledge is produced in and between human beings since although a computer can capture and transform data into information, only human beings can convert this data and information into knowledge.

As can be intuited, knowledge is an essential part of the human being and although it has not been able to be defined rigorously, research on the role it plays within organizations and economies has a wide repertoire of consequences in management theory and more broadly in economic theory.

Usually the process involves techniques to capture, organize, and store workers' knowledge, to transform it into intellectual capital that provides benefits and can be shared.

Currently, information technologies provide tools that support knowledge management in companies, supporting the collection, transfer, security and systematic administration of information, along with systems designed to help make the best use of that knowledge.

In detail, it refers to the tools and techniques designed to preserve the availability of information held by dominant individuals and facilitate decision making, as well as reduce risk. It is a software market and an area in consulting practice, related to disciplines such as competitive intelligence. A particular issue of knowledge management is that knowledge cannot be easily encoded in digital form, such as the intuition of dominant individuals that comes with years of experience and being able to recognize the various patterns of behavior that someone with less experience cannot recognize.

The Knowledge Management process, also known in its development phases as "corporate learning" or "organizational learning", has mainly the following objectives:

Knowledge transfer (an aspect of Knowledge Management) has always existed as a process in organizations. Informally through discussions, sessions, reflection meetings, etc., and formally through learning, professional training and training programs. As an emerging business practice, Knowledge Management has seen the introduction of the chief knowledge officer, and the establishment of corporate intranets, wikis, and other knowledge and information technology practices.

Contenido

Los profesionales de la gestión del conocimiento pueden utilizar un léxico específico para explicar la dinámica de la transferencia del conocimiento. Por ejemplo en los diez años pasados, Internet ha visto a grupos establecer discusiones sobre el uso del capital intelectual como valor métrico; el significado tácito contra conocimiento explícito o más.

Intellectual capital proceedings

Management corresponds to the set of processes and systems that allow the intellectual capital of an organization to increase significantly, by managing its problem-solving capabilities efficiently, the way to generate competitive advantages over time.

If we consider ancient markets, the main strength was based on land management, in other words, the person who owned the most land was the one who could generate better products. Let's remember the Middle Ages, the fiefs and the feudal lords. Currently we find ourselves in a society where changes occur at a surprising pace. What is a competitive advantage today will become a market requirement tomorrow.

In the current era, in which maintaining an advantage is almost impossible, organizations must resort to methods that allow them to increase these advantages. One of these advantages is knowledge. Knowledge Management aims to manage this knowledge, making it a competitive advantage over its peers.

Knowledge Management analyzes the existing knowledge in the company from a dynamic perspective. This perspective is complemented by the contributions of intellectual capital literature, which addresses the analysis of knowledge from a dynamic approach.

In the business field, certain companies such as Unión Fenosa, Systematic, Carlo Bro or K3 Technologies LLC, develop and implement knowledge management and intellectual capital measurement programs.

According to the authors Aportela and Ponjuán in every organization there must be two types of strategy:

And according to the authors McElroy and Firestone, strategies are a type of knowledge and in themselves constitute a result of Knowledge Processing (McElroy and Firestone, 2000 in Aportela and Ponjuán, 2008). What this suggests to us is that one of its purposes of knowledge management is to increase the processing of information and knowledge, this information processing is prior to the generation of strategies or knowledge. These two authors also mention that it is important to align the organization's strategies, they must be aligned with the knowledge management strategies, this in order to assign a value to the company's strategy that may or may not be objective.

One of the important strategies that must be considered in organizations is the ability of their individuals and groups to process information, learn and adapt to develop knowledge and be able to apply it in their environment. This becomes a fundamental strategy for the development of any organization, which will allow it to continue, survive, develop and innovate, what Aportela and Ponjuán call "sustainable innovation."

McElroy and Firestone have designed a structure for knowledge management strategies, which covers both the supply dimension, the demand dimension, and both in Knowledge Processing, related to the types of interventions that could be carried out (McElroy and Firestone, 2000). This strategy presents us with a matrix to determine the actions according to the processing of information and the type of interventions. According to these authors, the interventions can be:

La gestión del conocimiento intenta poner de relieve la ventaja competitiva que se da con el mejoramiento o el aprendizaje más rápido y crear nuevo conocimiento. El interés en la gestión del conocimiento se está conduciendo en parte por:.

Connectivity speed

Since its adoption by the business community and the population, the Internet has led to an increase in creative collaboration, learning and research, electronic commerce, and immediate information. With improved technologies, gone are the days of dusty shelves, imperfect or distorted messages, and slow mail. In many respects, the practice of knowledge management will continue to develop with the growth in the uses of collaboration made available by information technologies and through the Internet.

Online education, online discussions, and collaboration software are examples of knowledge management uses that support your process. Each use can expand the level of research available to an employee, while providing a platform to achieve specific goals or actions.

According to McElroy (Knowledge is produced in social systems, through people and the sharing process that occurs regularly between them. This process at an organizational level can be described by the so-called 'Knowledge Life Cycle' (CVC), which does not constitute a model, but rather a scheme that allows the different models to be placed in context. A large part of the actions carried out are designed to influence it, otherwise it is not Knowledge Management. The CVC begins with the detection of problems in the context of Organizational Processing: while people are busy developing organizational processes, they experience certain gaps in their knowledge of how to achieve a certain action or objective. It ends, with the choice of newly validated knowledge requests, beliefs and belief predispositions in the Distributed Organizational Knowledge Base** (BCOD) and its supports. The use of knowledge that follows occurs within the context of Organizational Processing and not Knowledge Processing; that new conflicts arise and are detected.

The main stages of the knowledge management process are storing, collecting, structuring, sharing, controlling, generating, distributing, encoding, using and exploiting.[14]​.

According to King, knowledge management presents a cycle for its best processing. The first step that King proposes has two aspects: Creation is the first, which refers to socializing, externalizing and reflecting on knowledge, either to generate new knowledge of the organization or replace existing knowledge. The second aspect is Acquisition, this involves searching, locating the source of the problem or knowledge, or grafting external knowledge.

The next step in the cycle has to do with the refinement of knowledge, in which it is explained, adapted, organized and standardized, evaluated and analyzed, which must be preserved and documented. This process marks the link with the next step, which is memory, that is, the part where the organization's knowledge repositories are formed.

After memory comes the process of sharing or transferring knowledge. When we talk about sharing it is just making knowledge available to anyone; On the other hand, when it refers to transfer, it is that the knowledge is transmitted directly to a specific collaborator. This is to get to the part of the use of knowledge in the organization, which can be used to elaborate and generate innovation, individual knowledge, collaborative problem solving, or reuse knowledge.

The last part of the process has to do with the performance of the organization, how knowledge management affects the development and management of the organization, to start the cycle again if necessary and as many times as required.

Model of the four phases of Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995)[16]​[17]​

This model contemplates that the generation of knowledge is based on the exchange of information and the constant interaction between types of knowledge (tacit and explicit):.

It conceives knowledge management as a process of interaction between tacit and explicit knowledge that has a dynamic and continuous nature (Bueno, 1999).[18] many organizations apply it even without having it in mind. The fundamental factors that must be considered by the organization are the mission, vision and values. The systematization, standardization and storage of knowledge, as well as facilitating access to it, is essential for the application of this model and any other in higher education institutions. A correct strategy to apply this model is to write down everything that is done, whether representative or not, and publish it in a language common to the organization (explicit knowledge). Part of the knowledge is not codifiable, it will always be in people's heads in the form of experiences (tacit knowledge), to access this, appropriate channels must be established between all the elements that make up the organization.

Arthur Andersen Model (1999)[19]​

The fundamental objective of this model is to identify where opportunities and strengths lie in terms of knowledge management. It is based on the fact that within an organization there are 4 sources that influence the administration of knowledge:

The application of this model in an organization or institution must take into consideration certain elements for the correct application of this model:

This is a slightly more recent model, it recognizes the need to accelerate the flow of information that has value. Highly valued information flows in the company-people and people-company sense, so that they can use it to create value. It emphasizes the personal responsibility of sharing and making knowledge explicit for the institution. It invites you to create the processes, culture, technology and systems that allow knowledge to be captured, analyzed, synthesized, applied, valued and distributed.[20]​.

Data mining (also called data extraction), is the practice (by automatic or semi-automatic means) of searching and exploring large stores of data resulting in the discovery of meaningful patterns and rules. To do this, data mining uses statistical computing, knowledge automation, and pattern recognition techniques (see single-source data systems, information resources Inc.).

La memoria corporativa") (corporate memory) se puede definir como el cuerpo total de los datos, de la información y de los conocimientos requeridos para dar a conocer los objetivos estratégicos de una organización. Una memoria corporativa es la combinación de un depósito (el espacio donde se almacenan los objetos y los artefactos), y la comunidad (la gente que interactúa con esos objetos para aprender, tomar decisiones, y entender el contexto).

La memoria corporativa se puede subdividir en los siguientes tipos:.

Las decisiones clave a tomar cuando exploramos la Memoria Corporativa son:.

Los términos alternativos y relacionados son: memoria de organización, memoria del grupo, base de conocimiento, depósito del conocimiento.

La mayoría de los esfuerzos comerciales de la administración del conocimiento han incluido la construcción de una cierta forma de memoria corporativa para capturar destreza, para apresurar el aprendizaje, para ayudar a la organización a recordar, para registrar el análisis razonado de la decisión, logros del documento o para aprender de las últimas fallas.

Distributed Organizational Knowledge Base/Knowledge Repositories

According to researchers from the Institute of Scientific and Technological Information of Havana, Cuba, Ivett María Apartela Rodríguez and Gloria Ponjuán Dante, "the combination of subjective and objective knowledge in an organization can be conceived as its Distributed Organizational Knowledge Base", which encompasses all knowledge results, including the informative summaries about them.

In their article titled "The Second Generation of Knowledge Management: a new approach to knowledge management",[21] both authors affirm that the Distributed Organizational Knowledge Base is manifested through the so-called "knowledge repositories", which are made up of managers (individual or group) and objects (documents, programs, etc.). They clarify that the knowledge of the managers is subjective knowledge; while that embodied in objects is objective knowledge.

Knowledge repositories, they explain, serve as a basis for discovering and mapping knowledge and are responsible for preserving and reflecting the knowledge requests produced in the Knowledge Life Cycles. They are the interface between the results of Knowledge Processing (BCOD) and which people make decisions and perform actions during the execution of their work.

In a GC architecture we find different tools and services that configure a complete GC solution as a final result.

As tools that support KM within companies, we can differentiate 3 groups or sets:

Other knowledge management strategies include:

The authors Aportela and Ponjuán define "Social Innovation Capital refers to the social capacity of an organization to innovate, produce and integrate new knowledge, as a component of its values. It constitutes the most valuable form of Intellectual Capital, since it is the only one whose purpose is the creation of the remaining forms of Intellectual Capital, including itself."[13]​.

The purpose of Knowledge Management (KM), as Aportela and Ponjuán explain to us in their definition of Social Innovation Capital, is to create products that generate new value, such as:

Similarly, Aportela and Porjuán describe the Second Generation of KM, with its vision of Knowledge Processing as a social process in itself, can speak in coherent terms about the value of Knowledge Production and Integration as an important aspect to consider in the calculation of the values ​​of Intellectual Capital in an entity. Currently, intellectual capital measurement and reporting schemes that do not take into account Social Innovation Capital and do not explicitly reflect the economic value of CVC are incomplete"[13]​.