One area of omission in knowledge intensive studies is within higher education/research where there is the virtuous circle of teaching, research and consulting professional work. Using a model adapted from Handzic (2001) and a survey modified from Arthur Andersen (1998) the perceived importance and perceived implementation to faculty members is explored. The discrepancy between results of the two forced the researchers to confront their own biases. Guidance was sought from ethnographic accounts which allowed allows the researcher to state personal feelings in a confessional accompaniment to the formal findings. | Towards understanding KM practices in the academic environment: The shoemaker’s paradox
