Paper Number
ECIS2026-2836
Paper Type
CRP
Abstract
Knowledge workers struggle to manage, retrieve, and apply knowledge across fragmented digital environments. Existing research is either dated or fragmented along either specific knowledge management challenges or domains. This study investigates limitations of personal knowledge management (PKM) through 27 semi-structured expert interviews with experienced knowledge workers. In our inductive study, we identify 50 first-order PKM challenges, which we organize into ten second-order themes and four aggregate dimensions that capture their underlying nature. Our categorization distinguishes cognitive, behavioral, technical, and information-related dimensions and maps all challenges onto four canonical knowledge management processes which enables a systematic diagnosis of where and why PKM breaks. In doing so, our study contributes to a more granular empirical catalogue of PKM challenges and a conceptual foundation for designing and evaluating future PKM solutions.
Recommended Citation
Korn, Falco; Kolender, Dennis; Ziolkowski, Rafael; Karger, Erik; and Ahlemann, Frederik, "Mind The Mess: A Matrix Of Personal Knowledge Management Challenges Across The Knowledge Lifecycle" (2026). ECIS 2026 Proceedings. 38.
https://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2026/cog_hbis/cog_hbis/38
Mind The Mess: A Matrix Of Personal Knowledge Management Challenges Across The Knowledge Lifecycle
Knowledge workers struggle to manage, retrieve, and apply knowledge across fragmented digital environments. Existing research is either dated or fragmented along either specific knowledge management challenges or domains. This study investigates limitations of personal knowledge management (PKM) through 27 semi-structured expert interviews with experienced knowledge workers. In our inductive study, we identify 50 first-order PKM challenges, which we organize into ten second-order themes and four aggregate dimensions that capture their underlying nature. Our categorization distinguishes cognitive, behavioral, technical, and information-related dimensions and maps all challenges onto four canonical knowledge management processes which enables a systematic diagnosis of where and why PKM breaks. In doing so, our study contributes to a more granular empirical catalogue of PKM challenges and a conceptual foundation for designing and evaluating future PKM solutions.