1. Introduction

The resource-based approach (RBA), a dominant paradigm in strategic management (Hitt et al., 2016), underscores the intrinsic connection between internationalization and competitive advantage, which is rooted in core capabilities and unique resources (Zou & Stan, 1998). This framework positions intellectual capital (IC) as a critical driver in securing competitive advantage in global markets (Bose & Oh, 2004). While IC has been extensively explored in relation to organizational performance (Galbreath, 2005), its specific implications for export performance (EP) remain insufficiently addressed. Export performance, defined as the extent to which an organization meets its financial and strategic objectives through export marketing strategies (Birru, 2016), has garnered significant global attention due to its pivotal role in ensuring organizational survival and generating income (Olyanga et al., 2022).

Knowledge Management (KM) is pivotal in linking Intellectual Capital (IC) with Export Performance (EP) and plays a crucial role in achieving international competitive advantages (Barkema & Drogendijk, 2007). Beyond tangible assets, KM significantly enhances organizational performance (Andreeva & Kianto, 2012), especially in dynamic, competitive environments where knowledge is the primary asset (Zack et al., 2009).

IC and KM are interrelated concepts encompassing organizational knowledge activities, from accumulation to strategic use (Rastogi, 2000). IC represents the stock of knowledge-human, structural, and relational capital (Bontis, 2001). KM focuses on applying this knowledge to generate organizational value (Meier, 2011).

This study offers a unique exploration of the complex relationship between knowledge management (KM) and export performance (EP). The central research question, derived from our framework, is: Does KM moderate the relationship between intellectual capital (IC) and EP? Notably, there is a clear scarcity of previous studies examining the intersection of KM and internationalization, particularly in emerging economies (Gammeltoft & Cuervo-Cazurra, 2021).

This research focuses on the Peruvian textile export sector, excluding intermediary activities such as agriculture, fishing, and extraction. It specifically targets manufacturing firms within the textile sector that are active in foreign markets because this segment plays a critical role in Peru's economic growth (SIICEX, 2021). Notably, textile exports are primarily driven by small and medium-sized family businesses. The textile and apparel industry, one of the oldest sectors in the global economy, makes a significant contribution to economic development, job creation, poverty reduction, female empowerment, and export revenue generation (Hasan et al., 2016).

The article introduces a general theoretical framework that integrates variables used in the proposed model and concludes with the formulation of research hypotheses. In the methodology section, we justify the criteria for using the PLS-SEM approach in this study and describe the data collection process through surveys. Finally, we present the results and provide a concluding discussion on the topic.

2. Theoretical framework

2.1 Export Performance (EP)

Export performance, defined as "the firm's activities directed toward the outcome(s) in the export market" (Chen et al., 2016), is crucial for strengthening a nation's strategic position internationally (Benfratello et al., 2022). According to Shashank & Mayya (2021), it is essential to identify the factors of export success in order to establish mechanisms for strengthening them, as SMEs are generally unable to compete in the current globalized world without identifying the necessary drivers. While factors influencing export success have been widely studied, no universal model explains which resources or capabilities best support internationalization because there are significant differences across regions and countries (Coudounaris & Björk, 2024).

2.2 Intellectual capital (IC) and Export Performance (EP)

Intangible assets such IC provide a lasting strategic advantage by creating value (Youndt, Subramaniam, & Snell, 2004). IC plays a vital role in firm performance across both developing and industrialized nations (Kolachi & Shah, 2013) , and it is strongly related to EP (Oura et al., 2016).

Previous studies in some emerging countries like India and China (Vishnu & Kumar Gupta, 2014; Lu, Wang, & Kweh, 2014) have demonstrated a significant positive relationship between IC and performance. Most recently, Safari et al. (2022) identified intangible factors as potential drivers of performance in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs). Although research has explored the IC-performance link extensively (Curado et al., 2014), these studies remain limited to certain industries and regions (Mention & Bontis, 2013). Bontis (2001) is a seminal reference in the field of intellectual capital, structuring it into three main components: human (knowledge, skills, experiences, and employee competencies), structural (organizational infrastructure, processes, systems, and databases), and relational (the organization's external relationships with clients, suppliers, and other stakeholders).

2.3 Human capital (HC) and Export Performance (EP)

Human capital (HC) involves assessment and quantification of knowledge, skills, and attitudes (Kim & Kumar, 2009). Rua et al. (2018) emphasize that specialized knowledge-such as managers' understanding of the market, internationalization processes, and expertise in areas like international marketing, management, finance, and the effective use of information and communication technologies-plays a crucial role in positively impacting the export performance (EP) of SMEs. Agyapong et al. (2016) found that managerial and innovative capabilities drive changes in the performance of micro and small family firms in developing economies.

Skills refer to the application of knowledge in work contexts and the ability to develop effective solutions to challenges (Chong et al., 2014). Additionally, a positive attitude and workforce engagement are essential components of HC (Hamdam & Damirchi, 2011). Managerial attributes, such as experience, commitment, cognitive approaches, and a global perspective, significantly influence EP (Diamantopoulos & Kakkos, 2007). Anwar & Shah (2021) suggest that top managers of SMEs in emerging economies must remain focused on entrepreneurial activities to achieve superior performance. Moreover, entrepreneurial "global thinking" is critical for international performance (Miocevic & Crnjak-Karanovic, 2012).

2.4 Structural capital (SC) and Export Performance (EP)

The assessment of structural capital (SC) encompasses both process capital and organizational culture, each of them plays a critical role in enhancing export performance (EP). Process capital, in particular, improves EP by optimizing quality, delivery timelines, and the introduction of new products (Cheng et al., 2010). Achieving these outcomes requires the development of internal and external capabilities, including information systems, routines, procedures, databases, organizational culture, and process manuals (Chen et al., 2006). The digitization of process documents into centralized repositories facilitates easy access, thereby encouraging interaction and collaboration among individuals with diverse experiences and expertise (Lee & Van den Steen, 2010). In such environments, teamwork often supersedes individual efforts, driving significant process improvements (Chong et al., 2011). According to Kuratko & Audretsch (2009), organizations learn and, through this process, enhance their performance. Ahmad & Lee (2016) argue that technologies and export orientation are critical sources of learning and innovation, which, in turn, enhance the performance of firms in less-developed countries.

Organizational capital also exerts a positive influence on EP (Ribau et al., 2017). Within this domain, organizational culture is pivotal in fostering and strengthening institutional activities. It promotes social interaction and trust among employees, creating a collaborative atmosphere (Janet & Alton, 2013). Facilitating knowledge exchange between experienced and novice employees is particularly advantageous for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), where peer learning is a critical component of development (Cheng et al., 2014). Organizational innovativeness is regarded as a means to enhance a firm's performance and strengthen its competitive advantage (Olowofeso et al., 2021). Falahat et al. (2020) found that innovation capability is an essential factor that contribute to the competitive advantage of exporting SMEs.

The seamless flow of information, as opposed to its stagnation within the organization, is essential for acquiring new knowledge and insights. In this context, knowledge repositories serve as vital resources, acting as hubs for information dissemination and innovation (Lee & Lan, 2011).

2.5 Relational capital (RC) and Export performance (EP)

RC encompasses relationships with both customers and businesses. Keskin et al. (2021) highlight that distinctive firm capabilities-particularly relational capabilities-equip export firms with a competitive advantage and enhance their export performance in international markets. A strong corporate image assists in acquiring new customers, retaining existing ones, accessing financial support, and obtaining other resources (Ordoñez de Pablos, 2003). Le (2023) suggests that internationalization is feasible when passive information-sharing processes exist throughout supply chains. Understanding business partners helps identify their specific needs and align processes to meet them, facilitating access to local business networks (Hilmersson, 2012). Building business relationships not only opens doors to new customers and suppliers but also leverages intangible resources like market insights, consumer preferences, legal considerations, and technological trends to drive internationalization (Ruzzier et al., 2007).

Knowledge of customer needs and the macroeconomic environment in target markets is vital for guiding strategic decisions and achieving market dominance (Hilmersson & Jansson, 2012). A customer-centric approach enhances value within marketing channels and strengthens business relationships.

Rooted in network theory, the internationalization process emphasizes the importance of relationships within business networks (Pedrini, 2007). Participation in global networks offers access to new market opportunities and valuable resources (Souchon et al., 2012). Connections with intermediaries, such as agents and distributors, provide crucial strategic insights (Elg, 2008). Balancing the creation of new relationships with the nurturing of existing ones is essential for improved outcomes (Witt, 2004). Forming alliances and collaborations with other companies significantly impacts export performance (EP) by providing complementary knowledge, resources, and legitimacy (Peña, 2002).

2.6 Knowledge management (KM) and Export Performance (EP)

The concept of Knowledge Management (KM) has evolved over time. Converting tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge is crucial, especially in resource-scarce environments (Egbu et al., 2005). Some organizations have effectively stored explicit knowledge in databases to enhance their operational capabilities (Woo et al., 2004). Recent research by Avenyo et al. (2021) highlights a positive link between digital technology adoption and firm performance, emphasizing the growing role of technology in KM processes.

Wexler (2001) advocates for the development of infrastructure and tools that facilitate the efficient generation, codification, and transmission of knowledge across the organization. Trust is pivotal in enabling knowledge exchange, influencing the shared mindset within the organization and improving operational efficiency (Edvinsson, 2003). Knowledge transfer can occur both formally and informally, through methods such as mentoring, professional gatherings, and collaborative tools like quality circles and coaching (Egbu et al., 2005). Knowledge utilization, as described by Filius et al. (2000), involves applying existing knowledge to new contexts and innovations. Achieving success in international markets requires continuous development of knowledge reservoirs, including technological expertise and productive capabilities (Alegre et al., 2012).

KM has gained significant attention in organizations for its role in enhancing competitiveness (Call, 2005). Various approaches to KM have emerged, some focusing on technological aspects and others on the human element (Gloet & Terziovski, 2004).

International exposure plays a critical role in boosting global performance and fostering corporate expansion (Li et al., 2020). KM is a key factor in enhancing export performance (EP), with the pursuit of specialized knowledge and innovative product strategies directly linked to improved international competitiveness (Bernard et al., 2012, 2018).

Hypothesis 1: There is a positive correlation between knowledge management and export performance.

Intellectual capital (IC) is a crucial asset for organizations, encapsulating knowledge and the capacity for innovation and adaptation in the global market. It consists of human capital (HC), structural capital (SC), and relational capital (RC), which are interlinked and directly influence business performance. Knowledge management (KM) acts as the enabler that transforms IC into tangible value and intangible assets by facilitating the generation and application of knowledge. KM amplifies IC's impact through strategic practices, knowledge-sharing mechanisms, and information technologies, enhancing its effectiveness (Zack et al., 2009). Research confirms the positive relationship between KM and IC, demonstrating their collective role in improving organizational performance (Shih et al., 2010). The specific KM strategy adopted influences the relationship between KM and organizational performance (Ling, 2013).

KM strategies, especially those incorporating information and communication technologies, strengthen the positive impact of SC on export performance (EP) (Tovstiga & Tulugurova, 2007). Effective KM facilitates the conversion of SC's embedded information into actionable knowledge, thereby positively shaping the dynamic relationship between SC and EP (Karagiannis et al., 2008).

Nawab et al. (2015) demonstrate that effective knowledge management practices-particularly knowledge acquisition, dissemination, and application-positively influence export performance, especially when innovation is present as a mediator. Moreover, structural capital, including organizational structures and the relationships built through intellectual capital, plays a significant role in enhancing export outcomes. Cabrilo et al. (2018) argue that KM practices drive structural capital to foster superior innovation and market performance

We suggest that the integration of KM into organizational processes can significantly amplify the impact of structural capital on export performance, making it a key factor in driving export success, particularly in SMEs.

Hypothesis 2: Knowledge management serves as a positive moderator in the association between structural capital and export performance.

Human capital (HC), a key component of intellectual capital (IC), creates value within organizations through human resource strategies and process optimization (Roos et al., 2007). Knowledge management (KM) boosts organizational performance by disseminating knowledge from managers with global and intercultural expertise (Piri et al., 2013). A human-centric KM framework can further elevate performance by nurturing HC, leveraging it through effective KM strategies aligned with human resource management practices (Roos et al., 2007).

Tjahjadi et al. (2020) investigated how human capital readiness impacts business performance, with a focus on the role of global market orientation. Their findings indicate that while human capital positively influences business performance, its effects are partially mediated by market orientation, suggesting an indirect but critical relationship that could also apply to export success

Kengatharan (2019) explored the intersection of knowledge management, intellectual capital, and entrepreneurship, discussing how various facets of intellectual capital (including human capital) enhance firm performance. Kengatharan's work underscores how knowledge management strategies positively moderate the effects of intellectual capital, enhancing overall business performance. This study found that knowledge management strategies effectively mediate and enhance organizational performance. This includes the role of human capital, where the interplay between knowledge management practices and intellectual capital contributes to a firm's competitiveness, particularly in export-driven contexts.

Hypothesis 3: Knowledge management plays a positive moderating role in the correlation between human capital and export performance.

RC shapes how companies engage with customers, suppliers, and other organizations, positively influencing knowledge generation and innovation (Ojeda-Gómez et al., 2007). Strengthening these relationships expands market share and enhances performance (Bozbura, 2004). RC's impact on performance is amplified in firms with strong knowledge management (KM) practices that focus on interpersonal interactions and organizational affiliations (Roos et al., 2007).

A people-centered KM strategy strengthens the link between RC and export performance (EP). Similarly, a technology-focused KM strategy, integrating relationships with knowledge databases, fosters innovation and improves global expansion outcomes (Gloet & Terziovski, 2004).

Qiao & Wang (2021) emphasize that the integration of tacit and explicit knowledge sharing enhances organizational performance and highlights the significance of relational capital in sustaining competitive advantages in global supply chains.

Tovstiga & Tulugurova (2007) illustrates that KM strategies that utilize information and communication technologies can significantly amplify the positive effects of RC on export performance. This is particularly evident when firms integrate customer and supplier relationships into their knowledge management systems, which facilitates innovation and global expansion.

Thus, KM not only enhances the direct impact of RC on EP but also acts as a strategic enabler that integrates knowledge across various organizational boundaries, thus fostering improved relationships and operational efficiencies in the global marketplace.

Hypothesis 4: Knowledge management serves as a positive moderator in the association between relational capital and export performance.

The model proposed in Figure 1 shows the interrelationships between the constructs.

Figure 1
Proposed Theoretical Model
Source: own elaboration

3. Methodology

3.1 Sample

To conduct this study, the target population was centered on the Peruvian textile sector. This choice was motivated by the fact that companies exclusively engaged in product commercialization primarily function as intermediaries and facilitators of trade. Consequently, we exclude firms with products typically processed by other entities because they are subject to various restrictions-conditions that are not generally applicable to the textile sector (Cardoza et al., 2016). Focusing on a single sector allowed for better control over a greater number of contextual variables. Additionally, the Peruvian textile sector exported nearly USD 2,000 million in 2022 (Banco Central de Reserva del Perú, 2023).

The data for this study were collected using a questionnaire that incorporated scales adapted and validated in previous research. The scale for measuring export performance was derived from Lages & Lages (2004), which has been widely employed in prior studies. The scales for assessing intellectual capital and knowledge management were adapted from various sources. A five-point Likert scale was used (1='strongly disagree', 5= 'strongly agree').

The PLS-SEM method is able of handling relatively small sample sizes compared to other approaches, such as covariance-based SEM. A well-established rule in PLS-SEM suggests that the sample size should be at least ten times the maximum number of indicators (items) for a latent construct in the measurement model or the maximum number of structural paths leading to a construct in the structural model (Hair et al., 2017). In our case, the minimum required sample size was 91 surveys.

We identified the target population using the database from the Peruvian Exporters Association (ADEX Data Trade, 2021). Given a prior study in the sector, we sent online surveys to fully identify companies (with email addresses and contact people). A total of 249 responses were received (34% response rate) over a period of 5 months. After excluding incomplete responses, we obtained 207 valid surveys, which is sufficient for applying the PLS-SEM method.

Through the incorporation of control variables, we found no significant differences between the sample and the reference population regarding the quantity of exported products or the number of export destination countries.

3.2 Measurements

3.2.1 Dependent variable: Export performance (EP)

EP was evaluated through four indicators: export intensity (EP1), export growth (EP2), perceived success (EP3), and strategic position and market share (EP4) (Lages & Lages, 2004). These indicators are situated within economic, financial, and strategic dimensions, and encompass satisfaction with export outcomes.

3.2.2 Independent variable: InteUectuat capitai (IC)

HC was measured in three dimensions: knowledge (HC1 to HC5), skills (HC6 to HC8), and attitudes (HC9 to HC11). SC was measured in two dimensions: processes (SC1 to SC4) and organization (SC5 to SC7). RC was measured in two dimensions: clients (RC1 to RC6) and business (RC7 to RC11).

3.2.3 Moderating variable: Knowledge management (KM)

The KM variable has been measured through the identification of its four stages: knowledge generation (KM1 to KM3), knowledge codification (KM4 to KM5), knowledge transmission (KM6), and knowledge usage (KM7 to KM9).

Control variables:

TIME represents the number of years the company has been engaged in export activities (Laureano & Marques, 2009); WORK indicates the number of workers (Shinkle & Kriauciunas, 2010); NO_PROD indicates the number of products exported (Morgan et al., 2004); and NO_COUNTRY represents the number of countries to which the company exports (Johanson & Vahlne, 2009). The incorporation of control variables into the model allowed for isolating the effect of the main variables, thus ensuring that results were not influenced by external factors and enabling a more precise interpretation of causal relationships. Furthermore, it improved internal validity by controlling factors such as company size, export experience, and geographical location, providing a clearer view of the sector's performance.

4. Results

4.1 Partial least squares (PLS)

Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) was employed to test the proposed hypotheses (Hair et al., 2017). It was selected due to the relatively small sample size, the presence of multiple dependent variables, and the absence of assumptions about the distribution of variables, rendering it more suitable in this context (Sarstedt et al., 2014). To estimate both the structural and measurement models, SmartPLS3 software (Hair et al., 2017) was used with PLS algorithms and bootstrapping resampling. The significance of the path coefficients and the overall fit of the model were assessed through bootstrapping of 1,000 subsamples (Reinartz et al., 2009).

4.2 Measurement model

Our model comprises five latent variables: EP, HC, SC, RC, and KM. The focus is on examining the relationship between the three dimensions of IC and EP, with KM serving as a moderating variable in the relationships between HC and EP, SC and EP, and RC and EP, as outlined in hypotheses 2, 3, and 4. It is anticipated that in companies with robust KM, there will be a stronger and more positive relationship between HC, SC, RC, and EP. The study aims at evaluating the presence of these moderating effects by employing interaction terms in a two-stage approach (Rigdon et al., 2011).

Table 1

Scales, loads, and measures of validity and reliability.

Notes: Significance through a resampling procedure (1,000 repetitions). * p < 0.10; ** p < 0.05; *** p < 0.001.CR: composite reliability; AVE: average variance extracted. Source: own elaboration.

The PLS-SEM model employed in this study has been validated, and its reliability has been confirmed. Evaluation of the measurement model indicates that all measures demonstrate a high level of validity and reliability. The indicators exhibit loadings greater than 0.70, and the Average Variance Extracted (AVE) exceeds the threshold of 0.50 (and slightly below 0.70), thus reflecting convergent validity, as presented in Table 1. Discriminant validity of the indicators is established, as indicated by higher loads compared to cross loads, as demonstrated in Table 2. Regarding the moderator variable (KM), all indicators exhibit loadings greater than 0.70. The assessment of convergent validity yields an AVE of 0.671, while Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability stand at 0.755 and 0.860, respectively, thus indicating satisfactory internal consistency. In summary, the quality criteria proposed by Hair et al. (2017) for the measurement model were met.

Table 2

Cross-Loadings

Source: own elaboration.

4.3 Structural model

The model effectively predicts the behavior of endogenous variables (SC, RC, and EP), with R^2 values of 0.73, 0.52, and 0.93, respectively, indicating a robust explanatory power of the model. The path coefficients, highlighted in the studies by Hair et al. (2017) and Monge et al. (2013), demonstrate significance. These findings support the H1 hypothesis, suggesting a positive and significant impact of KM on EP. Furthermore, the model integrates moderator effects and moderate mediation, indicating that the direct effects may vary depending on the value of the moderator variable (KM). Moderating mediation occurs when the mediator variable (SC or RC) interacts with the moderator (KM), influencing the indirect effect between the exogenous variable (HC) and the endogenous variable (EP) via the mediator. Significance tests are conducted on the connecting paths to establish moderate mediation. When interpreting results, particular attention is given to the significance of the interaction term, and the estimated effect values reflect the magnitude of the relationship when the moderator variable equals zero. If the moderator variable's level changes by one standard deviation, the simple effects would also change by the magnitude of the estimated coefficient for the corresponding interaction terms.

According to the findings outlined in Table 3, the interaction term KM*HC exhibits a positive effect on EP (0.063), whereas the simple effect of HC on EP is 0.262 (Hypothesis H2). This suggests that in companies with a high degree of KM, the influence of HC on EP will be more pronounced compared to those with lower KM. The bootstrapping analysis comprising 1,000 subsamples demonstrates that the interaction term is significant at the 95% confidence level. The interaction effect size f^2 is 0.018, indicating a medium effect.

Table 3

Standardized Model Coefficients Corrected for Bias, Confidence Interval (95%).

Notes: resampling standard error; Source: own elaboration.

Concerning the KM*RC interaction term, it also demonstrates a positive and significant association (Hypothesis H4). Higher levels of KM imply a stronger linkage between RC and EP, whereas lower KM levels result in a relatively weaker association between RC and EP, albeit with a minor difference. The interaction effect size f^2 in this instance is 0.0001, indicating a small effect. However, there is no support for H2, as the interaction term KM*SC exhibits a negative effect on EP (-0.252), contrasting with the simple effect of SC on EP at 0.758. This implies that as KM levels increase, the relationship between SC and EP diminishes, whereas for lower KM levels, the association between SC and EP strengthens. The interaction effect size f^2 in this scenario is 0.383, suggesting a substantial effect. In summary, the results uphold hypotheses H1 and H4 but fail to provide evidence for H2. The interaction terms significantly influence the model, underscoring the importance of considering the moderating impact of KM on the relationships between HC, SC, RC, and EP. The model incorporating interaction effects demonstrates enhanced explanatory power compared to the model devoid of these effects.

5. Discussion

Our study contributes significantly to KM literature, particularly by examining the moderating role of KM in the relationship between IC dimensions and EP. First, we confirm that KM has a positive impact on EP (Ha et al., 2021; Latif et al., 2021; Mbaidin, 2022). This supports our initial findings that KM plays a crucial role in enhancing performance outcomes.

However, our assessment of KM as a moderator in the relationship between the dimensions IC (human capital [HC], structural capital [SC], and relational capital [RC]), and EP yields more nuanced results. Specifically, KM was found to positively moderate the relationship between HC and EP, suggesting that higher levels of KM strengthen the link between HC and EP. This finding is consistent with the work of Roos et al. (2007), who emphasized the positive impact of KM through people-centered strategies on organizational performance. Additionally, Piri et al. (2013) further corroborate this view, noting that KM's effects on performance are notably tied to elevated levels of HC.

Recent studies reinforce the importance of KM in enhancing HC's contribution to business outcomes. For instance, Tjahjadi et al. (2020) demonstrated that human capital readiness, supported by strategic KM practices, directly boosts business performance, including export success. This highlights the critical role of KM in leveraging HC for performance outcomes.

Our findings also align with the notion that KM serves as a strategic enabler for organizations. Duan et al. (2022) show how KM enhances the use of relational capital, thereby improving innovation and performance. While this work primarily focuses on relational capital, it emphasizes KM's broader role in fostering better outcomes through both human and structural capital.

In contrast, the moderating effect of KM on the relationship between RC and EP is less pronounced, with a relatively small effect size. This suggests that KM strategies that do not prioritize technological integration may struggle to fully leverage RC to generate value. Roos et al. (2007) argue that when KM practices focus primarily on people rather than technology, RC may lack the capacity to create substantial value. This is consistent with the findings of Gloet & Terziovski (2004), who pointed out that non-significant RC, coupled with substantial knowledge databases, leads to weak positive moderation in the RC-EP relationship.

Furthermore, the interaction between KM and SC yields a negative coefficient, contrary to the direct positive effect of SC on EP. This suggests that the knowledge transmission dimension may not be relevant in this context, potentially due to a lack of technological focus in the KM strategy (Karagiannis et al., 2008). This finding reflects the challenges in converting tacit knowledge into explicit, actionable knowledge, a point also discussed by Ismail et al. (2024), who emphasized the importance of absorptive capacity in this process.

In summary, our study reinforces the idea that HC and SC are the most direct contributors to EP, as suggested by Edvinsson (2003), who noted the importance of excluding RC from models due to empirical results lacking power. These findings may also be influenced by the composition of the sample, which mainly consists of small and medium-sized textile exporting firms. In such companies, KM tends to operate informally, which may limit its effectiveness (Hutchinson & Quintas, 2008). Many of these firms recognize the strategic importance of their intangible assets but lack the measurement tools to manage them effectively. Consequently, our results highlight the need for companies to develop an "optimum profile" of IC that maximizes synergy with KM to enhance performance.

Overall, these findings suggest that a balanced KM strategy, integrating both technological and people-centric elements, is essential for leveraging the full potential of intellectual capital in improving export performance. However, the context of the industry and the maturity of KM systems must be considered to ensure the strategy's success.

6. Conclusions

This research provides valuable insights into the relationship between intangible resources and organizational performance, with a particular focus on the textile sector in Peru. The study highlights the pivotal role of knowledge management in enhancing export performance and confirms that knowledge management practices positively influence organizational outcomes, especially when combined with high levels of human capital. This finding aligns with previous research that emphasizes the critical role of intellectual capital in driving performance, particularly in export-driven industries.

However, the study also reveals nuanced dynamics. While knowledge management was found to strengthen the link between human capital and export performance, its moderating effect on relational capital was found to be insignificant. This suggests that knowledge management strategies in these companies may prioritize human-centered approaches, potentially overlooking the technological and relational aspects that could also drive export success. Moreover, the lack of relevance of knowledge transmission in improving export performance points to challenges in effectively converting information into actionable knowledge. This may reflect the informal knowledge management practices prevalent within these small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), where measurement tools and formal processes are often lacking.

It is important to consider the limitations of the study, particularly its reliance on a sample predominantly comprising SMEs, which may prevent extending the findings to larger firms or other industries. The study also highlights the need for companies to adapt their knowledge management strategies to their specific context, ensuring that intellectual capital is effectively aligned with organizational needs to maximize performance. Future research should aim to expand the sample to include a more diverse range of companies and sectors, using alternative methods such as interviews or case studies to deepen the understanding of how intangible resources and knowledge management practices impact organizational performance. Despite these limitations, our findings contribute valuable insights into the literature and offer practical implications for managers seeking to leverage knowledge management to boost export performance.

References

ADEX Data Trade (2021). https://www.adexdatatrade.com/

Agyapong, A., Ellis, F., & Domeher, D. (2016). Competitive strategy and performance of family businesses: Moderating effect of managerial and innovative capabilities. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 28(6), 449-477. https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2016.1217727

Ahmad, A., & Lee, K. (2016). Embodied technology transfer and learning by exporting in the Ethiopian manufacturing sector. Innovation and Development, 6(2), 281-303. https://doi.org/10.1080/2157930X.2016.1197330

Alegre, J., Pla-Barber, J., Chiva, R., & Villar, C. (2012). Organizational learning capability, product innovation performance and export intensity. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 24(5), 511-526. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2012.674672

Andreeva, T., & Kianto, A. (2012). Does knowledge management really matter? Linking KM: practices, competitiveness and economic performance. Journal of Knowledge Management, 16(4), 617-636. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673271211246185

Anwar, M., & Shah, S. (2021). Entrepreneurial orientation and generic competitive strategies for emerging SMEs: Financial and nonfinancial performance perspective. Journal of Public Affairs, 21(1), e2125. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2125

Avenyo, E., Tregenna, F., & Kraemer-Mbula, E. (2021). Do Productive Capabilities Affect Export Performance? Evidence from African Firms. The European Journal of Development Research, 33, 304-329. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-021-00364-6

Banco Central de Reserva del Perú (2023). BCRP Data - Exportaciones. Gerencia Central de Estudios Económicos. https://estadisticas.bcrp.gob.pe/estadisticas/series/mensuales/

Barkema, H., & Drogendijk, R. (2007). Internationalising in small, incremental or larger steps? Journal of International Business Studies, 38(7), 1132-1148. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400315

Benfratello, L., Bottasso, A., & Piccardo, C. (2022). R&D and export performance: exploring heterogeneity along the export intensity distribution. Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, 49(2), 189-232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40812-022-00209-1

Bernard, A., Jensen, J., Redding, S., & Schott, P. (2012). The empirics of firm heterogeneity and international trade. Annu. Rev. Econ., 4(1), 283-313. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-economics-080511-110928

Bernard, A., Jensen, J., Redding, S., & Schott, P. (2018). Global firms. Journal of Economic Literature, 56(2), 565-619. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20160792

Birru, M. (2016). The impact of capital structure on financial performance of commercial banks in Ethiopia. Global Journal of Management and Business Research, 16(8), 44-52.

Bontis, N. (2001). Assessing knowledge assets: a review of the models used to measure intellectual capital. International Journal of Management Reviews, 3 (1), 63-76. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2370.00053

Bose, S., & Oh, K. (2004). Measuring strategic value-drivers for managing intellectual capital. The Learning Organization, 11(4/5), 347-356. https://doi.org/10.1108/09696470410538242

Bozbura, F. (2004). Measurement and application of intellectual capital in Turkey. The Learning Organization, 11(4/5), 357-367. https://doi.org/10.1108/09696470410538251

Cabrilo, S., Dahms, S., & Stojanovic, J. (2018). A multidimensional view of intellectual capital and dynamic innovative performance. Sustainability, 10(10), 3645. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103645

Call, D. (2005). Knowledge management - not rocket science. Journal of Management, 9(2), 19-30. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270510590191

Cardoza, G., Fornes, G., Farber, V., Duarte, R., & Gutierrez, J. (2016). Barriers and public policies affecting the international expansion of Latin American SMEs: evidence from Brazil, Colombia, and Peru. Journal of Business Research, 69(6), 2030-2039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.148

Chen, J., Sousa, C., & He, X. (2016). The determinants of export performance: a review of the literature 2006-2014. International Marketing Review, 33(5), 626-670. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-10-2015-0212

Chen, S., Duan, Y., Edwards, J., & Lehaney, B.(2006).Towardunderstanding inter-organizational knowledge transfer needs in SMEs: insight from a UK investigation. Journal of Knowledge Management, 10(3), 6-23. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270610670821

Cheng, C., Ou, T., Chen, T., & Chen, Y. (2014). Transferring cognitive apprenticeship to manufacturing process knowledge management system. VINE, 44(3), 420-444. https://doi.org/10.1108/VINE-03-2013-0011

Cheng, M., Lin, J., Hsiao, T., & Lin, T. (2010). Invested resource, competitive intellectual capital, and corporate performance. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 11(4), 433-450. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691931011085623

Chong, A., Ooi, K., Bao, H., & Lin, B. (2014). Can e-business adoption be influenced by knowledge management? An empirical analysis of Malaysian SMEs. Journal of Knowledge Management, 18(1), 121-136. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-08-2013-0323

Chong, C., Chong, S., & Gan, G. (2011). The KM processes in Malaysian SMEs: an empirical validation. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 9(2), 185-196. https://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2011.8

Coudounaris, D. N. & Björk, P. (2024). Export performance and international resources and capabilities: a quantitative study on born globals. Review of International Businessand Strategy, 24(2), 264-291. https://doi.org/10.1108/RIBS-06-2023-0064

Curado, C., Guedes, M., & Bontis, N. (2014). The financial crisis of banks (before, during and after): An intellectual capital perspective. Knowledge and Process Management, 21(2), 103-111. https://doi.org/10.1002/kpm.1434

Diamantopoulos, A., & Kakkos, N. (2007). Managerial assesment of export performance: Conceptual framework and empirical illustration. Journal of International Marketing, 15(3), 1-31. https://doi.org/10.1509/jimk.15.3.1

Duan, Y., Yang, M., Huang, L., Chin, T., Fiano, F., de Nuccio, E., & Zhou, L. (2022). Unveiling the impacts of explicit vs. tacit knowledge hiding on innovation quality: The moderating role of knowledge flow within a firm. Journal of Business Research, 139, 1489-1500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.10.068

Edvinsson, L. (2003). Corporate Longitude: What You Need To Know To Navigate The Knowledge Economy. Financial Times Prentice Hall, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper. ISBN: 0273656279, 9780273656272

Egbu, C., Hari, S., & Renukappa, S. (2005). Knowledge management for sustainable competitiveness in small and medium surveying practices. Structural Survey, 23(1), 7-21. https://doi.org/10.1108/02630800510586871

Elg, U. (2008). Inter-firm market orientation and the influence of network and relational factors. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 24(1), 55-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2007.08.001

Falahat, M., Ramayah, T., Soto-Acosta, P., & Lee, Y. (2020). SMEs internationalization: The role of product innovation, market intelligence, pricing and marketing communication capabilities as drivers of SMEs' international performance. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 152, 119908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.119908

Filius, R., de Jong, J., & Roelofs, E. (2000). Knowledge management in the HRD office: a comparison of three cases. Journal of Workplace Learning, 12(7), 286-295. https://doi.org/10.1108/13665620010353360

Galbreath, J. (2005). Which resources matter the most to firm success? An exploratory study of resource-based theory. Technovation, 25(9), 979-987. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2004.02.008

Gammeltoft, P., & Cuervo-Cazurra, A. (2021). Enriching internationalization process theory: insights from the study of emerging market multinationals. Journal of International Management, 27(4), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2021.100884

Gloet, M., & Terziovski, M. (2004). Exploring the relationship between knowledge management practices and innovation performance. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 15(5), 402-409. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410380410540390

Ha, S., Lo, M., Suaidi, M., Mohamad, A., & Bin Razak, Z. (2021). Knowledge management process, entrepreneurial orientation, and performance in SMEs: evidence from an emerging economy. Sustainability, 13(17), 9791. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13179791

Hair, J., Hult, G., Tomas, M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage. ISBN: 1452217440

Hamdam, H., & Damirchi, G. (2011). Managing intellectual capital of small and medium size enterprises in Iran case study: Ardabil province SMEs. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3(2), 233-240.

Hasan, K., Mia, M., Rahman, M., Ullah, A., & Ullah, M. (2016). Role of textile and clothing industries in the growth and development of trade and business strategies of Bangladesh in the global economy. International Journal of Textile Science, 5(3), 39-48. https://doi.org/10.5923/j.textile.20160503.01

Hilmersson, M. (2012). Experiential knowledge types and profiles of internationalising small and medium-sized enterprises. International Small Business Journal, X, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242612458443

Hilmersson, M., & Jansson, H. (2012). Reducing uncertainty in the emerging market entry process: on the relationship among international experiential knowledge, institutional distance, and uncertainty. Journal of International Marketing, 20(4), 96-110. https://doi.org/10.1509/jim.12.0052

Hitt, M., Xu, K., & Carnes, C. (2016). Resource based theory in operations management research. Journal of Operations Management, 41, 7794. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2015.11.002

Hutchinson, V., & Quintas, P. (2008). Do SMEs do knowledge management? Or simply manage what they know? International Small Business Journal, 26(2), 131-151. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242607086571

Ismail, M. D., Ahmad, S. Z., & Singh, S. K. (2024). Absorptive capacity, relational capital and export performance among SME exporters: the moderating effect of contract. Journal of Knowledge Management, 28(7), 2120-2139. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-02-2023-0144

Janet, W., & Alton, C. (2013). The peculiarities of knowledge management processes in SMEs: the case of Singapore. Journal of Knowledge Management, 17(6), 958-972. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-04-2013-0163

Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J. (2009). The Uppsala internationalization process model revisited: From liability of foreignness to liability of outsidership. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(9), 1411-1431. https://doi.org/org/10.1057/jibs.2009.24

Karagiannis, D., Waldner, F., Stoeger, A., & Nemetz, M. (2008). A knowledge management approach for structural capital. En T. Yamaguchi (Ed.), Practical Aspects of Knowledge Management, Proceedings, 135-146. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89447-6_14

Kengatharan, N. (2019). A knowledge-based theory of the firm. International Journal of Manpower, 40(6), 1056-1074. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJM-03-2018-0096

Keskin, H., Ayar Sentürk, H., Tatoglu, E., Gölgeci, I., Kalaycioglu, O., & Etlioglu, H. T. (2021). The simultaneous effect of firm capabilities and competitive strategies on export performance: The role of competitive advantages and competitive intensity. International Marketing Review, 38(6), 1242-1266. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-09-2019-0227

Kim, D., & Kumar, V. (2009). A framework for prioritization of intellectual capital indicators in R&D. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 10(2), 277-293. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930910952669

Kolachi, N., & Shah, H. (2013). BRICS countries and their strategic HRD agenda in 2020. International Journal of Management & Information Systems (IJMIS), 17(2), 105-112. https://doi.org/10.19030/ijmis.v17i2.7714

Kuratko, D., & Audretsch, D. (2009). Strategic entrepreneurship: exploring different perspectives of an emerging concept. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2008.00278.x

Lages, L., & Lages, C. (2004). The STEP scale: a measure of short-term export performance improvement. Journal of International Marketing, 12(1), 36-56. https://doi.org/10.1509/jimk.12.1.36.25647

Latif, K., Afzal, O., Saqib, A., Sahibzada, U. & Alam, W. (2021). Direct and configurational paths of knowledge-oriented leadership, entrepreneurial orientation, and knowledge management processes to project success. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 22(1), 149-170. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-09-2019-0228

Laureano, E., & Marques, L. (2009). International operations and export performance: an empirical study. Management Research News, 32(3), 272-285. https://doi.org/10.1108/01409170910943129

Le, P. (2023). Determinants of frugal innovation for firms in emerging markets: the roles of leadership, knowledge sharing and collaborative culture. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 18(9), 3334-3353. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOEM-02-2021-0258

Lee, D., & Van den Steen, E. (2010). Managing know-how. Management Science, 56(2), 270-285. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1090.1101

Lee, M., & Lan, Y. (2011). Toward a unified knowledge management model for SMEs. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(1), 729-735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.07.025

Li, Y., Zhang, Y., & Shi W. (2020). Navigating geographic and cultural distances in international expansion: The paradoxical roles of firm size, age, and ownership. Strategic Management Journal, 41, 921-949. https://doi.org/org/10.1002/smj.3098

Ling, Y. (2013). The influence of intellectual capital on organizational performance-knowledge management as moderator. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 30(3), 937-964. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-011-9257-5

Lu, L., Wang, X., & Keh, H. T. (2014). The role of marketing intensity in moderating CSR and financial performance in luxury fashion. Open Journal of Business and Management, 12(5), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojbm.2024.125152

Mbaidin, H. (2022). The mediating effect of entrepreneurial orientation on the impact of knowledge management processes on successful organizational performance at industrial sector in Jordan. Journal of Intelligence Studies in Business, 12(1), 20-33. https://doi.org/10.37380/jisib.v12i1.916

Meier, M. (2011). Knowledge Management in Strategic Alliances: A Review of Empirical Evidence. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13 (1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2010.00287.x

Mention, A., & Bontis, N. (2013). Intellectual capital and performance within the banking sector of Luxembourg and Belgium. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 14(2), 286-309. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691931311323896

Miocevic, D., & Crnjak-Karanovic, B. (2012). Global mindset - a cognitive driver of small and medium-sized enterprise internationalization: The case of Croatian exporters. Euro Med Journal of Business, 7(2), 142-160. https://doi.org/10.1108/14502191211245589

Monge, C., Cruz, J., & López, F. (2013). Impact of lean manufacturing, sustainable manufacturing and continuous improvement in operational efficiency and environmental responsibility in Mexico. Technological information, 24(4), 15-31. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-07642013000400003

Morgan, N., Kaleka, A., & Katsikeas, C. (2004). Antecedents of export venture performance: a theoretical model and empirical assessment. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 90-108. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.68.1.90.24028

Nawab, S., Nazir, T., Zahid, M. M., & Fawad, S. M. (2015). Knowledge management, innovation, and organizational performance. International Journal of Knowledge Engineering, 1(1), 43-48. https://doi.org/10.18178/IJKE.2015.V1.7#8203

Ojeda-Gómez, J., Simpson, M., Koh, S., & Padmore, J. (2007). Achieving competitive advantage in the Mexican footwear industry. Benchmarking, 14(3), 289-305. https://doi.org/10.1108/14635770710753103

Olowofeso, E., Ojo, O., & Ajayi, M. (2021). Influence of entrepreneurial orientation on the profitability of real estate firms in South West, Nigeria. Journal of Management and Economic Studies, 3(1), 16-27. https://doi.org/10.26677/TR1010.2021.722

Olyanga, A., Shinyekwa, I., Ngoma, M., Nkote, I., Esemu, T., & Kamya, M. (2022). Export logistics infrastructure and export competitiveness in the East African Community. Modern Supply Chain Research and Applications, 4(1), 39-61. https://doi.org/10.1108/MSCRA-09-2021-0017

Ordoñez de Pablos, P. (2003). Intellectual capital reporting in Spain: A comparative review. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 4(1), 61-81. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930410567059

Oura, M., Zilber, S., & Lopes, E. (2016). Innovation capacity, international experience and export performance of SMEs in Brazil. International Business Review, 25(4), 921-932. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2015.12.002

Pedrini, M. (2007). Human capital convergences in intellectual capital and sustainability reports. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 8(2), 346-366. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930710742880

Peña, I. (2002). Intellectual capital and business start-up success. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 3(2), 180-198. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930210424761

Piri, M., Jasemi, M., & Abdi, J. (2013). Intellectual capital and knowledge management in the Iranian space industries. VINE, 43(3), 341-356. https://doi.org/10.1108/VINE-08-2012-0036

Qiao, S., & Wang, Q. (2021). The Effect of Relational Capital on Organizational Performance in Supply Chain: The Mediating Role of Explicit and Tacit Knowledge Sharing. Sustainability. 13. 10635. https://doi.org/10.3390/su131910635

Rastogi, P. (2000). Knowledge management and intellectual capital-the new virtuous reality of competitiveness. Human systems management, 19 (1), 39-48. https://doi.org/10.3233/HSM-2000-19105

Reinartz, W., Haenlein, M., & Henseler, J. (2009). An empirical comparison of the efficacy of covariance-based and variance-based SEM. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 26(4), 332-344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2009.08.001

Ribau, C., Moreira, A., & Raposo, M. (2017). SMEs innovation capabilities and export performance: An entrepreneurial orientation view. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 18(5), 920-934. https://doi.org/10.3846/16111699.2017.1352534

Rigdon, E., Ringle, C., Sarstedt, M., & Gudergan, S. (2011). Assessing heterogeneity in customer satisfaction studies: Across industry similarities and within industry differences. Advances in International Marketing, 22, 169-194. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1474-7979(2011)0000022011

Roos, G., Roos, G., Pike, S., & Fernstrom, L. (2007). Managing Intellectual Capital in Practice. Routledge, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780080479118

Rua, O., França, A., & Fernández, R. (2018). Key drivers of SMEs export performance: The mediating effect of competitive advantage. Journal of Knowledge Management, 22(2), 257-279. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-07-2017-0267

Ruzzier, M., Antoncic, B., Hisrich, R., & Konecnic, M. (2007). Human capital and SME internationalization: a structural equation modeling study. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 24(1), 15-29. https://doi.org/10.1002/cjas.3

Safari, A., Saleh, A., & Balicevac, V. (2022). Enhancing the export activities of small and medium-sized enterprises in emerging markets. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 37(5), 1150-1166. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-08-2020-0388

Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C., & Hair, J. (2014). PLS-SEM: Looking Back and Moving Forward. Long Range Planning, 47(3), 132-137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2014.02.008

Shashank, B., & Mayya, S. (2021). A Conceptual Study on Performance of Small-Scale Industries in India. International Journal of Case Studies in Business, IT, and Education, 342-353. https://doi.org/10.47992/IJCSBE.2581.6942.0139

Shih, C., Chen, W., & Morrison, M. (2010). The impact of intellectual capital on business performance in Taiwanese design industry. Journal of Knowledge Management Practice, 11(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-06-2015-0231

Shinkle, G., & Kriauciunas, A. (2010). Institutions, size and age in transition economies: Implications for export growth. Journal of International Business Studies, 41, 267-286. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2009.9

SIICEX - Comprehensive Foreign Trade Information System (2021). Report of Peruvian Exports by Sector. Ministry of Foreign Trade and Tourism. Government of Peru.

Souchon, A., Sy-Changco, J., & Dewsnap, B. (2012). Learning orientation in export functions: impact on export growth. International Marketing Review, 29(2), 175-202. https://doi.org/10.1108/02651331211216970

Tjahjadi, B., Soewarno, N., Hariyati, H., Nafidah, L. N., Kustiningsih, N., & Nadyaningrum, V. (2020). The Role of Green Innovation between Green Market Orientation and Business Performance: Its Implication for Open Innovation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 6(4), 173. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc6040173

Tovstiga, G., & Tulugurova, E. (2007). Intellectual capital practices and performance in Russian enterprises. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 8(4), 695-707. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930710830846

Vishnu, S., & Kumar Gupta, V. (2014). Intellectual capital and performance of pharmaceutical firms in India. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 15(1), 83-99. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-04-2013-0049

Wexler, M. (2001). The who, what and why of knowledge mapping. Journal of Knowledge Management, 5, 249-263. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000005868

Witt, P. (2004). Entrepreneurs' networks and the success of start-ups. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 16, 391-412. https://doi.org/10.1080/0898562042000188423

Woo, J., Clayton, M., Johnson, R., Flores, B., & Ellis, C. (2004). Dynamic knowledge map: reusing experts' tacit knowledge in the AEC industry. Automation in Construction, 13, 203-207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2003.09.003

Youndt, M., Subramaniam, M., & Snell, S. (2004). Intellectual capital profiles: An examination of investment and returns. Journal of Management Studies, 41(2), 335-361. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2004.00435.x

Zack, M., McKeen, J., & Singh, S. (2009). Knowledge management and organizational performance: an exploratory survey. Journal of Knowledge Management, 13(6), 392-409. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270910997088

Zou, S., & Stan, S. (1998). The Determinants of Export Performance: A Review of the Empirical Literature between 1987 and 1997. International Marketing Review, 15(5), 333-356. https://doi.org/10.1108/02651339810236290

Notas

Autor notes

*Autor para para dirigir correspondencia.

Declaração de interesses