Requirements Engineering

, Volume 24, Issue 4, pp 503–521 | Cite as

A requirements engineering methodology for knowledge management solutions: integrating technical and social aspects

  • Meira LevyEmail author
  • Irit Hadar
  • Itzhak Aviv
Original Article


This paper proposes a unified knowledge management requirements engineering methodology (KM-REM) for tackling the complex nature of knowledge-intensive organizations. Despite the importance of KM for the success of knowledge-intensive organizations, the concept of RE for KM solutions is still vague lacking. Its definitions and guidelines for addressing the different facets of KM during the RE process are yet to be well-defined, encompassing social and technical aspects thereof. Applying the design science research paradigm by using a method engineering methodology, the KM-REM method was developed and implemented in a case study involving a global IT provider firm. This allowed for a comprehensive analysis and requirements specification for a KM solution, which was validated based on expert (managers) evaluation. KM-REM provides comprehensive, practical guidance and tools for KM analysts and RE professionals, for conducting KM-oriented RE, toward enhancing knowledge-intensive business processes with embedded KM solutions. Moreover, KM-REM facilitates tractability in the RE process, by focusing on manageable KM requirements. Thus, the contribution of KM-REM is threefold. First, it extends the research on RE for KM solutions as a specialized area within the RE discipline. Second, it cohesively organizes the RE dimensions and modeling principles for KM, providing customized guidelines and tools. Third, it demonstrates how the perspectives of traditional RE methods can be extended to include social and cultural aspects.


Requirements engineering Knowledge engineering Knowledge management Knowledge-intensive business processes Knowledge audit 


  1. 1.
    Lönnqvist A (2004) Business performance measurement for knowledge-intensive organizations. In: Twelfth world productivity congress, Hong Kong, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Garvin DA (1993) Building a learning organization. Harv Bus Rev 71(4):78–91Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Humayoun M, Qazi A (2015) Towards knowledge management in RE practices to support software development. J Softw Eng Appl 8:407–418Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bresciani P, Donzelli P, Forte A (2003) Requirements engineering for knowledge management in eGovernment. In: Wimmer MA (eds) Knowledge management in electronic government KMGov 2003. Lecture notes in computer science (Lecture notes in artificial intelligence), Springer, Heidelberg, p 2645zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pilat L, Kaindl H (2011) A knowledge management perspective of requirements engineering. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on research challenges in information sciences, pp 1–12Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Davenport TH, Prusak L (1998) Working knowledge: how organizations manage what they know. Harvard Business School Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nonaka I, Georg K (2009) Perspective-tacit knowledge and knowledge conversion: controversy and advancement in organizational creation theory. Organ Sci 20(3):635–652Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Earl M (2001) Knowledge management strategies: toward a taxonomy. J Manag Inf Syst 18(1):215–233Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Choy SY, Lee WB, Cheung CF (2004) A systematic approach for knowledge audit analysis: integration of knowledge inventory, mapping and knowledge flow analysis. J Univ Comput Sci 10(6):674–682Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Forstenlechner I, Lettice F (2007) Cultural differences in motivating global knowledge workers. Equal Oppor Int J 26(8):823–833Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Remus U, Schub S (2003) A blueprint for the implementation of process-oriented knowledge. Manag Knowl Process Manag 10(4):237–253Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gronau N, Weber E (2004) Management of knowledge intensive business processes. In: Desel J, Pernici B, Weske M (eds) Business process management. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Alavi M, Leidner DE (2001) Review: knowledge management and knowledge management systems: conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Q 25(1):107–136Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tiwana A (1999) Knowledge management toolkit. Prentice Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kamara J, Anumba C, Carrillo PM (2002) A CLEVER approach to selecting a knowledge management strategy. Int J Project Manag 20(3):205–211Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Liebowitz J, Rubenstein-Montano B, McCaw D, Buchwalter J, Browning C (2000) The knowledge audit. Knowl Process Manag 7(1):3–10Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Burnet S, Illingworth L, Webster L (2004) Knowledge auditing and mapping: a pragmatic approach. Knowl Process Manag 11(1):25–37Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lee WB, Shek V, Cheung B (2007) Auditing and mapping the knowledge assets of business processes: an empirical study. In: Proceedings of second international conference on knowledge science, engineering and management, Melbourne, Australia, pp 11–16Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Perez-Soltero A, Barcelo-Valenzuela M, Palma-Mendez JT (2006) Knowledge audit methodology with emphasis on core processes. In: European and mediterranean conference on information systems, SpainGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Handzic M, Lagumdzija A, Celjo A (2008) Auditing knowledge management practices: model and application. Knowl Manag Res Pract 6(1):90–99Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tu SW, Eriksson H, Gennari JH, Shahar Y, Musen MA (1995) The application of PROTÉGÉ-II to protocol-based decision support. Artif Intell Med 7(3):257–289Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Angele J, Fensel D, Landes D, Studer R (1998) Developing knowledge-based systems with MIKE. J Autom Softw Eng 5(4):389–418Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schreiber G, Akkermans H, Anjewierden A, de Hoog R, Shadbolt N, van de Velde W, Wielinga B (2000) Knowledge engineering and management: the Common KADS methodology. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mumford E (1995) Effective requirements analysis and systems design: the ethics method. Information systems Macmillan information systems series. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Checkland P, Scholes J (1999) Soft systems methodology in action. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hevner AR, March ST, Park J, Ram S (2004) Design science in information systems research. MIS Q 28(1):75–105Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gregor S, Hevner AR (2013) Positioning and presenting design science research for maximum impact. MIS Q 37(2):337–355Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jashapara A (2004) Knowledge management: an integrated approach. Prentice Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Braun C, Wortmann F, Hafner M, Winter R (2005) Method construction—a core approach to organizational engineering. In: ACM symposium on applied computingGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sommerville I, Kotonya G (1998) Requirements engineering: processes and techniques. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zave P, Jackson M (1997) Four dark corners of requirements engineering. ACM Trans Softw Eng Methodol 6(1):1–30Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Levantakis T, Helms R, Spruit M (2008) Developing a reference method for knowledge auditing. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on practical aspects of knowledge management. pp 147–159Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Atkinson CJ (1997) Soft information systems and technologies methodology, SlSTeM 9: a case study on developing the electronic patient record. Requir Eng 2(1):1–22Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Jiang L, Eberlein A, Far BH (2008) A case study validation of a knowledge-based approach for the selection of requirements engineering techniques. Requir Eng 13(117):117–146Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Dermeval D, Vilela J, Bittencourt II et al (2016) Applications of ontologies in requirements engineering: a systematic review of the literature. Requir Eng 21(4):405–437Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Souag A, Mazo R, Salinesi C et al (2016) Reusable knowledge in security requirements engineering: a systematic mapping study. Requir Eng 21(2):251–283Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Iazzolino G, Pietrantonio R (2005) Auditing the organizational knowledge through a Balanced Scorecard-based approach. In: International conference on knowledge management in Asia, Pacific 2005, WellingtonGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Champlain JJ (2003) Auditing information systems, 2nd edn. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Salonius H, Käpyla J (2013) Exploring the requirements of regional knowledge-based management. J Knowl Manag 17(4):583–597Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kemmis S, McTaggart R, Nixon R (2014) Introducing critical participatory action research. In: The action research planner. Springer, SingaporeGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Koppenjan J, Groenewegen J (2005) Institutional design for complex technological systems. Int J Technol Policy Manag 5(3):240–257Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Dalpiaz F, Giorgini P, Mylopoulos J (2013) Adaptive socio-technical systems: a requirements-based approach. Requir Eng 2013(18):1–24Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Dehghani R, Ramsin R (2015) Methodologies for developing knowledge management systems: an evaluation framework. J Knowl Manag 19(4):682–710Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Rossi M, Tolvanen JP, Ramesh B, Lyytinen K, Kaipala J (2000) Method rationale in method engineering. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii international conference on system sciencesGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Hackathorn RD, Karimi JA (1998) Framework for comparing information engineering methods. MIS Q 15(2):203–220Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hong S, Van den Goor G, Brinkkemper S (1993) A formal approach to the comparison of object-oriented analysis and design methodologies. In: Proceedings of HICSS-26, pp 509–517Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Bright C (2007) A pragmatic approach to conducting knowledge audit. In: International conference on knowledge management in nuclear facilities Vienna, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Olsson T, Doerr J, Koenig T, Ehresmann M (2005) A flexible and pragmatic requirements engineering framework for SME. In: Proceedings of 13th IEEE international requirements engineering conferenceGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Fennessy G, Burstein F (2000) Using soft systems as a methodology for researching knowledge management problems. In: Proceeding of the international conference on systems thinking in management, Vic Australia, pp 180–185Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Walker DHT (2004) The competitiveness of having a knowledge advantage. RMIT University, Faculty of Business, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Stratton MJ (2004) Business case development and analysis. In: CBUC04—proceedings of the crystal ball user conference, Colorado, USAGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    PMI (2004) A guide to the project management body of knowledge. In: Project management instituteGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Yin RK (2003) Case study research, design and methods, 3rd edn. Sage, Newbury ParkGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Lamb R, Kling R (2003) Re-conceptualizing users as social actors in information systems research. MIS Q 27(2):197–235Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Muthu S, Whitman L, Cheraghi H (1999) Business process reengineering: a consolidated methodology. In: The 4th annual international conference on industrial engineering theory, applications and practiceGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Olmos K, Rodas J (2014) KMoS-RE: knowledge management on a strategy to requirements engineering. Requir Eng 19:421–440Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Finke A (2017) Socialization aspect in requirements engineering. In: REFSQ 2017 joint proceedings of the co-located eventsGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Kirikova M (2016) Continuous requirements engineering in freedom framework: a position paper. In: REFSQ 2016 joint proceedings of the co-located eventsGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Lauer TW, Tanniru M (2001) Knowledge Management Audit—a methodology and case study. Aust J Inf Syst 9(1):23–41 (Special issue on knowledge management) Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Benbasat I, Goldstein DK, Mead M (1987) The case research strategy in studies of information systems. MIS Q 11(3):369–386Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Myers C (2015) Is your company encouraging employees to share what they know? Harvard Business Review, Available at Accessed 7 Nov 2017
  62. 62.
    Figl K, Recker J (2016) Exploring cognitive style and task-specific preferences for process representations. Requir Eng 21(1):63–85Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Figl K (2017) Comprehension of procedural visual business process models. Bus Inf Syst Eng 59(1):41–67Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Karlsson F, Hedström K (2013) Evaluating end user development as a requirements engineering technique for communicating across social worlds during systems development. Scand J Inf Syst 25(2):57–82Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Industrial Engineering and ManagementShenkar, College of Engineering, Design and ArtRamat GanIsrael
  2. 2.Department of Information SystemsUniversity of HaifaHaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations