Knowledge is the concept of realizing and understanding the 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 knowledge that resides in the human brain and is difficult to articulate in words, texts, and drawings (Laudon & Laudon, 2014). In contrast, explicit knowledge is knowledge that resides in documents, databases, memos, and other forms of storage. First, knowledge is known to be one of the intangible assets of an organization (Laudon & Laudon, 2014). In an organization, knowledge is generated and collected through various “organizational learning” mechanisms such as data collection, experiments, and feedback. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Organizational learning can be defined as the process of change in which organizations can sustainably improve the use of accumulated knowledge in response to turbulent environments (Re, 2009). Typically, organizations are unable to fully exploit the knowledge they possess. However, through knowledge management (KM), organizations can seek to obtain or generate knowledge that can be useful and make it easily accessible to those who wish to use it. Knowledge Management (KM) has revolved around the interest of many disciplines in recent decades (Wiig, 2000). Database technologies, organizational sciences, decision support systems, performance support systems, and web technologies are among the disciplines of KM (Dalkir, 2005). Due to the multidisciplinary nature of KM, the phrase “Knowledge Management” is too complex to be spelled out in a universal definition. However, to put it simply, the concept of KM is technically involved in a cyclical process of knowledge creation, acquisition, use and sharing (Filemon & Uriarte, 2008). Nowadays, knowledge management has become one of the key factors for organizational survival and competitive advantage (Jeon et al., 2011; Omotayo, 2015). Basically, there are four key components of KM: knowledge, people, technology and process (Desouza, 2011). However, an organization's success can be influenced by its ability to leverage its knowledge-based resources. According to the historical perspective of KM, the classical evaluation of KM was born in the 1970s (Filemon & Uriarte, 2008). The work of Peter Drucker and Paul Strassman highlighted that information and explicit knowledge are considered valuable assets of an organization. Peter Senge's work, however, emphasizes the organization of learning and knowledge management. However, in the late 1970s, Everett Rogers and Thomas Allen laid the foundation for understanding how knowledge is generated, implemented, and integrated within the organization. Although the notion of knowledge as a competitive advantage emerged in the 1970s, it is in the mid-1980s that this notion becomes increasingly evident. During this period, Peter Drucker and other writers developed the idea of ​​managing knowledge that depends on artificial intelligence and expert systems. This development led to the concept of “knowledge acquisition,” “knowledge-based system,” and other computer-based entities. As a result, these have also led to further rapid growth of knowledge management systems. Later in the 1990s, a number of large management consultancies began to launch internal knowledge management initiatives(KM) (Filemon & Uriarte, 2008). Furthermore, as knowledge management has gained attention among businesses and organizations, the number of published articles, books, and journals has increased significantly. In 1994 the Europe-based International Knowledge Management Network (IKMN) went online, followed shortly thereafter by the Europe-based Knowledge Management Network (IKMN).Management Forum, United States. Subsequently, numerous other KM-related groups and publications began to appear. By the late 1990s, knowledge management projects had become big business for major international consultancies implementing “knowledge management solutions.” For example, Ernst & Young, Arthur Andersen and Booz-Allen & Hamilton. This can be attributed to the failure of Total Quality Management (TQM) and other business process initiatives which in turn make knowledge management (KM) a very desirable alternative. The evolution of knowledge management (KM) spans two generations. The first generations of KM were predominantly technology-driven, so they mainly involved the process of knowledge acquisition. However, the non-fulfillment techniques of the first generation of KM had pushed theorists to further investigate the course of action through which knowledge is created and shared. As a result, the second generation was primarily interested in people, behaviors and work style instead of focusing on the application of technology. However, in the present and future perspective of KM, the use of technology is becoming increasingly indispensable. Nowadays, with the emergence of intelligent technology, it can exert a great influence on the way we work, learn and interact. John Bordeaux, IBM Global Business Services associate partner in Social Knowledge Management, said smart technology will influence KM over the next three years and change the way people, as well as organizations, incorporate technology into decision making. (Alberi, 2015). Keeping in mind the dynamic nature of knowledge today, knowledge management (KM) has become the focus and necessity for organizations (Omotayo, 2015). The need to manage knowledge in the organization can be explained by various drivers in the environment. For example, the effect of globalization, technological progress, a highly competitive market and an aging workforce (Wiig, 2000; Dalkir, 2005; Omotayo, 2015). According to Ridge (2007), organizations that can effectively manage and exploit their knowledge are more likely to achieve better results. Furthermore, knowledge management (KM) plays a significant role in governing innovation at the organizational level (Ridge, 2007; Du Plessis, 2007). For example, encouraging a culture of open innovation through knowledge sharing and working collaboration between employees and other external stakeholders to develop new ideas. Through innovation, the organization will be able to differentiate itself from its competitors and will help (Desouza, 2011). According to a study conducted by Forbes in 2004, Fortune 500 companies suffered financial losses of $31.5 billion per year due to failure to share knowledge (Babcock, 2004). At management and individual levels, people are often involved in decision making on a daily basis. Therefore, the success of the organization may depend on the skills of managers and employees in making a decision and solving the problem. Moon and Desouza (2011) stated that managers will have more opportunities to make decisions when they are available, 2009).