Human resource management in Serbian organizations has ceased to be a purely administrative function, with strict formal characteristics of people regarded as labor force. If the concern about workers’ knowledge and developing their talents is the mission of human resource management in those companies, then its importance in the implementation of Knowledge Management will be growing from day to day. The control process which represents a function of the successful implementation of Knowledge Management should be a balance between autonomy and control of the program participants. At the very beginning of this paper, we will first provide some theoretical descriptions of the key concepts and after that we will introduce the central questions of the research, explaining how our Serbian case study will address them.

Knowledge Management is an emerging field and many issues are yet to be resolved, and much learning yet to be discovered because still it has not taken its final shape. The theoretical aspect is concerned with defining and describing the fundamentals of Knowledge Management. Definitions of knowledge range from practical, to conceptual, to philosophical; and from narrow to broad in scope. For present purposes, it is important that knowledge is viewed as a social creation emerging at the interface between people and information, and especially within communities engaged in communication, knowledge creation, and knowledge sharing and learning.

INTRODUCTION 3
PART I – LITERATURE REVIEW 5
1 Theoretical approaches to defining the factors affecting the KM efficiency 5
1.1 Corporate culture of a learning organization 6
1.2 HRM and Knowledge Management 7
1.3 Leadership for successful Knowledge Management 8
1.4 IT Tools and Knowledge Management 9
1.5 The role of control processes in KM efficiency 11
PART II – EMPIRICAL RESEARCH 12
2 Methodology 12
2.1 Samples 18
3 Results and discussion 19
3.1 Knowledge management 19
3.2 IT 21
3.3 Organizational culture 22
3.4 Leadership 23
3.5 HRM 24
3.6 Organizational Control 25
3.7 KM efficiency 25
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 27
REFERENCES 29