{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,27]],"date-time":"2026-04-27T10:11:41Z","timestamp":1777284701350,"version":"3.51.4"},"reference-count":10,"publisher":"Emerald","issue":"4","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2011,7,19]],"date-time":"2011-07-19T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1311033600000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.emerald.com\/insight\/site-policies"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":[],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2011,7,19]]},"abstract":"<jats:sec><jats:title content-type=\"abstract-heading\">Purpose<\/jats:title><jats:p><jats:italic>This study aims to test the validity of a knowledge work typology proposed by Davenport. Although this typology has been referenced extensively in the literature, it does not appear to have been empirically validated.<\/jats:italic><\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type=\"abstract-heading\">Design\/methodology\/approach<\/jats:title><jats:p><jats:italic>The typology was tested through a questionnaire survey among knowledge workers (<jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic>=459) in a multinational company. A Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was applied to determine the knowledge work groupings arising from the survey.<\/jats:italic><\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type=\"abstract-heading\">Findings<\/jats:title><jats:p><jats:italic>The vast majority of the respondents could not be grouped into any one of Davenport's four knowledge work types. Furthermore, PCA revealed four groupings: low\u2010agency collaboration; low\u2010 agency routine work; rule\u2010based work; and high\u2010agency expert work. The results confirm only one of Davenport's typology models, the Expert model. Davenport's Collaboration model was found to have elements of the Transaction model. The Transaction and the Integration typology models were not confirmed. Instead, two further models incorporating elements of both Transaction and Integration models emerged. Finally, in contrast to Davenport's typology, the clusters that emerged from this study do not fit a matrix structure.<\/jats:italic><\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type=\"abstract-heading\">Research limitations<\/jats:title><jats:p><jats:italic>A follow\u2010up qualitative study would be required to better understand the four models that emerged from the data and to elucidate organisational factors that underpin the models.<\/jats:italic><\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type=\"abstract-heading\">Originality\/value<\/jats:title><jats:p><jats:italic>This is the first empirical study testing the validity of Davenport's typology.<\/jats:italic><\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1108\/13673271111151965","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2011,7,25]],"date-time":"2011-07-25T10:25:44Z","timestamp":1311589544000},"page":"568-581","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":12,"title":["Validation of Davenport's classification structure of knowledge\u2010intensive processes"],"prefix":"10.1108","volume":"15","author":[{"given":"Anoush","family":"Margaryan","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Colin","family":"Milligan","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Allison","family":"Littlejohn","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"140","reference":[{"key":"key2022031720120232500_b1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Aarons, J., Linger, H. and Burstein, F. (2006), \u201cSupporting organisational knowledge work: integrating thinking and doing in task\u2010based support\u201d, in Organisational Learning, Knowledge and Change 2006 Conference Proceedings at University of Warwick, Coventry, UK, pp. 1\u201014, available at: www2.warwick.ac.uk\/fac\/soc\/wbs\/conf\/olkc\/archive\/olkc1\/papers\/225_aarons.pdf (accessed 28 January 2011).","DOI":"10.4018\/jkm.2006010101"},{"key":"key2022031720120232500_b2","unstructured":"Cross, R. and Parker, A. (2004), The Hidden Power of Social Networks: Understanding How Work Really Gets Done in Organizations, Harvard Business Press, Watertown, MA."},{"key":"key2022031720120232500_b3","unstructured":"Davenport, T. (2005), Thinking for a Living: How to Get Better Performance and Results from Knowledge Workers, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA."},{"key":"key2022031720120232500_b4","unstructured":"Davenport, T., Thomas, R. and Cantrell, S. (2002), \u201cThe mysterious art and science of knowledge worker performance\u201d, MIT Sloan Management Review, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 23\u201030."},{"key":"key2022031720120232500_b5","unstructured":"Donoghue, L., Harris, J. and Weitzman, B. (1999), \u201cKnowledge management strategies that create value\u201d, Outlook, Vol. 1, pp. 48\u201053, available at: www.accenture.com\/Global\/Research_and_Insights\/Outlook\/By_Alphabet\/Knowledgevalue.htm (accessed 28 January 2011)."},{"key":"key2022031720120232500_b6","unstructured":"Drucker, P.F. (1999), Management Challenges for the 21st Century, Butterworth\u2010Heinemann, Oxford."},{"key":"key2022031720120232500_b7","unstructured":"Giddens, A. (1991), Modernity and Self\u2010identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age, Stanford University Press, Palo Alto, CA."},{"key":"key2022031720120232500_b8","unstructured":"Margaryan, A., Milligan, C. and Littlejohn, A. (2009), \u201cSelf\u2010regulated learning and knowledge sharing in the workplace: differences and similarities between experts and novices\u201d, Proceedings of the 2009 Researching Work and Learning (RWL) Conference, Roskilde, Denmark."},{"key":"key2022031720120232500_b9","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Schneider, U. (2007), \u201cCoping with the concept of knowledge\u201d, Management Learning, Vol. 38 No. 5, pp. 613\u201033.","DOI":"10.1177\/1350507607083396"},{"key":"key2022031720120232500_b10","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Snowden, D. (2002), \u201cComplex acts of knowing: paradox and descriptive self\u2010awareness\u201d, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 100\u201011.","DOI":"10.1108\/13673270210424639"}],"container-title":["Journal of Knowledge Management"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"http:\/\/www.emeraldinsight.com\/doi\/full-xml\/10.1108\/13673271111151965","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/www.emerald.com\/insight\/content\/doi\/10.1108\/13673271111151965\/full\/xml","content-type":"application\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/www.emerald.com\/insight\/content\/doi\/10.1108\/13673271111151965\/full\/html","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,7,25]],"date-time":"2025-07-25T00:11:54Z","timestamp":1753402314000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"http:\/\/www.emerald.com\/jkm\/article\/15\/4\/568-581\/258853"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2011,7,19]]},"references-count":10,"journal-issue":{"issue":"4","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2011,7,19]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1108\/13673271111151965"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1108\/13673271111151965","relation":{},"ISSN":["1367-3270"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1367-3270","type":"print"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2011,7,19]]}}}