Developing the core principles of responsible knowledge management (rKM): Sections 3.1 & 3.2 – Ontological and epistemological foundations & methodological approach

This article is Sections 3.1 & 3.2 of Chapter 3 of a series featuring my Master’s thesis The Emerging Concept of Responsible Knowledge Management (rKM): Identifying and Formulating the Core Principles of rKM.

3.1 – Ontological and epistemological foundations

The ontological¹ stance of this research is shaped by a critical realist perspective, recognising that while the researcher does arrive at a trustworthy and authentic interpretation, it is still only one version of the truth among truths². The researcher is seen as a bricoleur making a bricolage³. Each incorporated practice makes the symbolic universe visible in a different way, thus complementing each other. The aim is to conjecture an interpretation of what constitutes responsible knowledge management (rKM).

The epistemological⁴ positioning is informed by interpretivism and constructivism, emphasising the conversational and symbolic nature of meaning. This approach holds that the result of the analysis will be a negotiated understanding between what the author of the academic text intends to convey and how the researcher interprets its meaning. The research assumes that knowledge and KM structures are real but not homogenic, static, or necessarily directly observable; the meaning they represent can be inferred and interpreted⁵. by the researcher from her specific location. Therefore, understanding is shaped⁶. by social interaction and the interpreter’s sense of contextual interpretive community.

The thesis recognises that neither KM nor rKM is a fixed or objective phenomenon; they are concepts that are continuously defined and redefined through academic discourse. By adopting an interpretivist lens, the research seeks to uncover how scholars currently conceptualise responsibility in the context of KM and how this is reflected in the choice of actions, practices, or concerns they focus their discussions on. The use of qualitative inquiry allows for an in-depth engagement with the academic texts, viewing them not merely as repositories of facts but as sites of meaning-making where competing perspectives on rKM are negotiated.

This thesis also integrates elements of hermeneutics⁷, particularly in its emphasis on interpreting academic discourse as a dynamic and contextually embedded process⁸. Understanding rKM requires recognising that knowledge management does not exist in isolation but is historically and socially situated. The hermeneutic dimension acknowledges that scholarly discussions of knowledge responsibility are shaped by specific epistemic traditions, disciplinary orientations, and ideological perspectives. Rather than seeking an absolute or universal definition of rKM, this thesis aims to bricolage a nuanced understanding of its core principles. Figure 4 summarises the essential views of the research framework.

3.2 – Methodological approach

The methodological choices of this thesis reflect a commitment to multidimensionality, ensuring that rKM is examined from both a synthesising and framework-generating perspective. The integrative literature review (ILR) serves as a foundational method for mapping the field of rKM, identifying how the concept has been discussed across academic literature. Grounded theory (GT) method is used to distil into view the key descriptions of rKM propagated in the articles themselves, thus inferring a framework for defining the concept.

Next part: 3.2.1 – Why the integrative literature review approach.

Article source: Koskinen, H. M. (2025). The Emerging Concept of Responsible Knowledge Management (rKM): Identifying and Formulating the Core Principles of rKM. (Master’s Thesis, LUT University).

Header image source: Created by Hanna M. Koskinen using ChatGPT.

References: