Digital Transformation and Knowledge Management in Community-Facing SMEs: A Literature Review

Authors

  • Ijang Faisal Universitas Muhammadiyah Bandung, Indonesia Author
  • Ucu Supriatna International Women University, Indonesia Author

Keywords:

digital transformation, knowledge management, knowledge, community development, knowledge retention

Abstract

Background: Digital Transformation and Knowledge Management in Community-Facing SMEs: A Literature Review has practical relevance for community-facing organizations because visible activity does not necessarily translate into durable organizational or stakeholder outcomes. In community-facing smes: a literature review, managers must coordinate experience, tacit knowledge, documented practices, external advice, lessons learned, and decision routines while responding to expectations from managers, employees, mentors, partner institutions, and community entrepreneurs. A program may expand reach or participation and still underperform when responsibilities are unclear, information is fragmented, or knowledge held by one person. Aims: This article develops a capability-based framework explaining how digital transformation and knowledge management may contribute to knowledge retention, capability, and innovation. It distinguishes simple activity from coordinated capability and identifies boundary conditions that can weaken otherwise positive relationships. Research Method: The paper uses an integrative conceptual review of established literature relevant to the focal domain, organizational capabilities, stakeholder relationships, and learning. It does not claim primary survey, interview, experimental, or transaction data. Results and Conclusion: The synthesis identifies four mutually dependent mechanisms: knowledge acquisition, translation into local practice, sharing and coaching, and institutionalization and renewal. Their value depends on transparent governance, usable information, proportionate participation requirements, and a review process that converts exceptions into improvement. The article argues that higher activity alone is an inadequate indicator of success because benefits can coexist with hidden workload, exclusion, dependency, or weakened trust. Contribution: The article contributes a diagnostic framework, linked performance indicators, six propositions for empirical testing, and a fivestage implementation pathway that can be used in resource-constrained community organizations.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Review: Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 107-136.

Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120.

Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128-152.

Deming, W. E. (1986). Out of the Crisis. MIT Press.

Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10-11), 1105-1121.

Gronroos, C. (1984). A service quality model and its marketing implications. European Journal of Marketing, 18(4), 36-44.

International Co-operative Alliance. (2015). Guidance Notes to the Co-operative Principles. International Co-operative Alliance.

Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992). The balanced scorecard: Measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 70(1), 71-79.

Nambisan, S., Lyytinen, K., Majchrzak, A., & Song, M. (2017). Digital innovation management: Reinventing innovation management research in a digital world. MIS Quarterly, 41(1), 223-238.

Nambisan, S., Wright, M., & Feldman, M. (2019). The digital transformation of innovation and entrepreneurship: Progress, challenges and key themes. Research Policy, 48(8), 103773.

Neely, A., Gregory, M., & Platts, K. (1995). Performance measurement system design: A literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 15(4), 80-116.

Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14-37.

OECD. (2021). The Digital Transformation of SMEs. OECD Publishing.

Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge University Press.

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations (5th ed.). Free Press.

Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. Oxford University Press.

Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of sustainable enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319-1350.

Verhoef, P. C., Broekhuizen, T., Bart, Y., Bhattacharya, A., Dong, J. Q., Fabian, N., & Haenlein, M. (2021). Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 122, 889-901.

Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(2), 118-144.

Warner, K. S. R., & Wager, M. (2019). Building dynamic capabilities for digital transformation. Long Range Planning, 52(3), 326-349.

Downloads

Published

2026-09-13

How to Cite

Digital Transformation and Knowledge Management in Community-Facing SMEs: A Literature Review. (2026). KRIEZ ACADEMY : Journal of Development and Community Service, 2(4). http://kriezacademy.com/index.php/kriezacademy/article/view/85