Is it the management of the object of knowledge, the management of the process of knowing or a combination of both. Each is proposing its own core competency as the key to the solution. Management paradigm Management is a highly elastic and flexible term. When applied to the fuzzy concepts of knowledge, it becomes a source of debate and confusion. Whether we are dealing with the classicals like Frederick W. Taylor, Lyndall Urwick, or the current gurus like Peter Drucker or Tom Peters, the fundamental notion of management is to establish and execute a process which is intended to achieve results.
Management is teleological in nature.
It is a human-driven process of pursuing goals and creating conditions of success to achieve these goals. Because not all goals are created equal and not all conditions are optimal, there are sound and poor management practices. Otherwise, it is a set of technical expedients which are unable to achive replicable results over time. Where things can become complicated, is when theorists and practitioners are attempting to describe this practice. Of course, if we can rely on a solid base of causal relationships, we could set realistic goals and if we had the expertise of effective means of action, we would have a set of sound knowledge management practices which could be of assistance to a wide range of managers and organizations.