KM Models, Frameworks, Cycles, and Pillars (And How KM Differs from Other Disciplines)

If your last query was “What are knowledge management models?” or “What is the knowledge management cycle?” you’ve reached the part of the journey where labels multiply. You’ll see talk of frameworks and value chains, of four key processes versus five steps of the knowledge management process, of KM lifecycle and KM cycle, of pillars and C’s, even references like the Meyer and Zack KM model and the five stages of the Zack cycle. The good news is that these models aren’t competing religions. They are different ways to describe the same practical loop: capture what matters, structure it so it can be trusted and found, deliver it where it will be used, observe outcomes, and improve. Once you internalize that loop, most frameworks become intuitive rather than abstract.

Let’s make sense of the names you’re likely to encounter—knowledge management frameworks, knowledge management theory, knowledge management value chain, hierarchy used in knowledge management, and the various pillars and C’s. We’ll close by clarifying how KM differs from adjacent practices like information management or CMS, because questions such as “How is knowledge management different from information management?” or “What is the difference between CMS and knowledge base?” inevitably appear when you start mapping the landscape.

The Universal Loop Behind Every KM Framework

Most readers arrive with versions of the same question: “What are the stages of knowledge management?”, “What are the 5 steps of the knowledge management process?”, “What are the four stages of the knowledge management process?” The labels vary by author, but the underlying rhythm is stable. You can think of it as Capture → Structure → Deliver → Use → Learn.

Capture is bigger than “write an article.” It includes extracting know-how from tickets and chats, harvesting lessons from post-incident reviews and change records, converting policies into concise guidance, and interviewing subject-matter experts so tacit knowledge gets documented. When someone asks “What are the three main areas of knowledge management?” they’re often gesturing at this blend: explicit knowledge you can write down, tacit expertise you have to surface, and embedded rules that live inside systems.

Structure is where governance, templates, taxonomy, and versioning live. This is where the hierarchy used in knowledge management—categories, subcategories, and tags—keeps knowledge navigable and machine-understandable. Structure also connects to questions like “What are the five major components of knowledge management?” because every component (authoring, taxonomy, lifecycle, search, analytics) leaves its fingerprints here.

Deliver is the boundary where models meet reality: semantic search with synonyms aligned to how users ask; recommendations in chat; answer cards on ticket forms; snippets inside apps. Many KM frameworks ignore this step or treat it as a black box, but if you’ve wondered “What is a knowledge management platform?” or “What is a knowledge management platform primarily used for in an organisation?”—this is it. Delivery differentiates KM from a static repository.

Use turns knowledge into performance. It’s what the knowledge management value chain is trying to emphasize: knowledge creates value only when it is used to make a decision, to serve a customer, to reduce risk, or to complete a task. Questions like “What are the four key processes of knowledge management?” often compress “deliver” and “use” together, but it helps to keep them conceptually distinct: making answers available is not the same as applying them.

Learn completes the loop. Feedback, ratings, search analytics, escalations after article use, and “no result” queries feed back into capture and structure. This is where models reference KM lifecycle, stages of knowledge management, or the five stages of the Zack KM cycle. The steps are iterative: knowledge breathes, grows, retires, and returns in a better form.

If you favor short mnemonics, this loop also maps nicely to the “C’s” that show up in searches like “What are the 5 C’s of knowledge management?” or “What are the 4 C’s?”: Create (Capture), Curate (Structure), Circulate (Deliver), Consume (Use), and Continue improving (Learn). Whether you see four, five, or six C’s, the essence doesn’t change.

Meyer & Zack, Value Chains, and Other Named Models

Named models help teams align on language. The Meyer and Zack KM model is often summarized as a knowledge refinery: acquisition, refinement, storage/retrieval, distribution, and presentation, with feedback providing quality control. If you’re skimming frameworks and comparing them to the loop above, it’s easy to see the mapping: acquisition ≈ capture; refinement and storage ≈ structure; distribution and presentation ≈ deliver; and quality feedback ≈ learn.

Similarly, knowledge management value chain diagrams translate the loop into business outcomes. They’re answering the unspoken “Why?” behind “What is the KM lifecycle?” by showing how knowledge inputs turn into saved time, fewer errors, faster resolutions, and better decisions. When someone asks “What are the five stages?” or “What are the six steps of the knowledge management cycle?” they’re usually asking how detailed the chain needs to be for your organization to measure it. The right answer is the one you will actually instrument.

You’ll also encounter lists of pillars—five pillars of knowledge management, four pillars of KM, or broader pillars of knowledge. Think of pillars as “what must be consistently true” for the loop to work: ownership and governance, findability and structure, delivery in the flow of work, measurement and improvement, and engagement of contributors and consumers. The number is less important than the discipline: if any pillar is weak, the loop stalls.

Components, Areas, and the Scope of a KM Program

Because models can feel abstract, many readers search for “What are the five major components of knowledge management?” or “What are the best four components?” Components help translate the loop into resourced capabilities. A pragmatic component breakdown looks like this:

• Authoring & Governance for templates, approvals, lifecycle reviews, and accountability.
  
  
• Taxonomy & Metadata for the “hierarchy used in knowledge management” so search understands intent and content is reusable across channels.
  
  
• Search & Discovery for indexing, synonyms, semantic ranking, and query analytics.
  
  
• Delivery & Contextualization for portals, chat/virtual agents, ticket and agent consoles, in-app help, and API access.
  
  
• Measurement & Improvement for article effectiveness, gap detection, deflection/FCR impact, and feedback loops.
  
  

When someone asks “What are the three main areas of knowledge management?” they may be expressing this component view more coarsely: people (roles, ownership, communities), process (lifecycle, governance, authoring standards), and technology (platforms that search, deliver, and measure). You will also see questions like “What are the 5 areas of knowledge?” or “What are the 8 dimensions of strategic management?” in broader management contexts; these aren’t KM-specific, but they remind us that knowledge intersects with strategy, operations, risk, and culture.

Types of Knowledge and Why They Matter to the Framework

Any framework worth adopting needs to respect the types of knowledge it handles. Searches like “How many types of knowledge management are there?” or “What are the three types of knowledge?” point to a classic trio:

• Explicit knowledge that can be written down—articles, SOPs, checklists, policies.
  
  
• Tacit knowledge that lives in experience and judgment and requires interviews, templates, and coaching to capture well.
  
  
• Embedded knowledge where rules exist inside systems (business logic, automation, forms).
  
  

The steps in your loop must support all three. Capture approaches differ (content harvesting, expert interviews, data extraction). Structure differs (templates for decision trees vs. policy summaries). Delivery differs (guided flows for agents vs. answer cards for end users). If a framework ignores tacit or embedded knowledge, you’ll end up with a repository that is tidy but incomplete.

Pillars, C’s, and the Temptation to Over-Engineer

The popularity of queries like “What are the 5 pillars?”, “What are the 4 pillars?”, “What are the five C’s?”, and “What are the 4 frameworks of knowledge?” tells us teams want a simple mnemonic. Use pillars and C’s as guardrails, not as grading rubrics. If the mnemonic helps rally behavior—write for retrieval, assign an owner, put knowledge in the flow, measure and improve—keep it. If it becomes an argument about whether you have four or five pillars, throw it out and return to the loop.

One practical way to keep pillars honest is to connect each to a measurable question. Governance: What percentage of articles have a named owner and next review date? Findability: What percentage of top queries return a click within the first three results? Delivery: What share of tickets and chats present a relevant suggestion? Improvement: How quickly do we update or retire low-performing content? Engagement: How many unique contributors added or improved content this month? Models without measures become wall art.

Frameworks Meet ITIL, SKMS, and Service Platforms

Sooner or later, you’ll search “Is knowledge management part of ITIL?” or “What is the knowledge management practice in ITIL v4?” ITIL treats knowledge as a practice that underpins many value streams. The Service Knowledge Management System (SKMS) is a concept that bundles repositories and tools that manage knowledge across the service lifecycle. When readers ask “In ITIL what is the KMS primarily used for?” they’re essentially aligning the universal loop to service management: capture knowledge from incidents, problems, and changes; structure it with lifecycle and ownership; deliver it to agents, request portals, and change planners; use it to reduce risk and speed restoration; learn from outcomes to refine both content and process.

If your stack includes ServiceNow, queries like “What is the knowledge management process responsible for in ServiceNow?” are asking whether the platform supports governance (yes), structured authoring (yes), search and synonyms (yes), and delivery (yes, across portal, agent workspace, and virtual agent). The framework doesn’t change, but the platform you use can make each step lighter or heavier. A good rule of thumb is to design your loop first, then let platform features make it faster—not the other way around.

KM vs. Information Management, CMS, LMS, CRM, and “Everything Else”

At this point, another family of questions surfaces: “How is knowledge management different from information management?”, “How is a KMS different from a CMS?”, “What is the difference between CMS and knowledge base?”, “Is Microsoft Teams a knowledge management system?” These aren’t trick questions; they’re practical boundaries.

Information management is about organizing and governing information assets over their lifecycle—files, data sets, records. It ensures custody, retention, access control, and compliance. Knowledge management is about making those assets useful at decision time. KM subordinates the repository to the outcome. That is why KM talks about templates for problem-symptom-solution, decision trees, guided flows, and contextual recommendations: the bias is toward actionability and trust in the moment of use.

A CMS excels at publishing and web presentation. Many organizations run their knowledge base on a CMS and do fine for public content, but a KMS adds answer-centric structures, answer reuse across channels, workflow-aware delivery (ticket, chat, in-app), and analytics tied to outcomes like deflection and FCR. LMS (learning management systems) focus on courses and training pathways—related to KM but optimized for a different job to be done. CRM manages customer relationships and sales processes; KM powers the answers that flow through CRM channels. Microsoft Teams is a collaboration platform, not a KMS, though it can be a useful delivery surface where knowledge cards or search extensions appear in the flow of conversation.

These distinctions matter because they influence your model’s stress points. If you treat KM as “a web page library,” you’ll optimize for publishing rather than answering. If you treat it as “a machine for producing correct, trusted, reusable answers in the flow of work,” you’ll choose different templates, metadata, and delivery patterns—and you’ll measure different things.

How Many Steps? Four, Five, or Six?

Searches such as “What are the four key processes?”, “What are the 5 steps of the KM process?”, and “What are the 6 steps of the knowledge management cycle?” are asking for permission to simplify. Take it. Use four if your team needs a starter model—Capture, Structure, Deliver, Improve—and treat “Use” as part of Deliver/Improve. Use five if you want to make “Use” visible because adoption is your biggest risk. Use six if your governance or technology environment requires you to separate approvals from publication or internal from external publication. The point of a model is to create shared habits, not to win a taxonomy contest.

Where Pillars Touch the Ground: Roles and Responsibilities

Even on a models page, readers ask “Who owns knowledge management?” or “Who is responsible for maintaining a KMS?” because a framework without roles is theater. The owner of a model is the KM program—sometimes a small central team, sometimes a federated guild—that maintains standards and lifecycle guardrails. Domain content owners are accountable for accuracy and applicability in their area; they decide what “good” looks like and when to retire or split content. Contributors include frontline agents and specialists who submit updates or flag gaps. Platform owners integrate delivery into the places where work happens. If your framework includes pillars like governance and improvement, those pillars must map to people, not just aspirations.

Measuring the Model (So It Isn’t Just Wall Art)

If your journey includes questions like “What are KM best practices?” or “How do you implement KM effectively?”, the answer is to instrument the loop. For Capture, measure time to publish and contribution diversity. For Structure, measure ownership coverage and on-time reviews. For Deliver, measure search success and suggestion hit rates in tickets and chats. For Use, follow article-assisted resolutions and deflection. For Learn, track update cadence and how quickly low-performing content improves or retires. If your model can’t be measured, it can’t be improved; if it isn’t improved, it will be ignored.

How Models Guide Everyday Decisions

Models aren’t meant to live in slide decks; they should shape choices. When someone proposes a long PDF, your model should ask whether the content will be findable and usable at the moment of need. When a new channel launches—say, a virtual agent—your model should guide how to structure answer fragments for conversational delivery. When a team wants to publish externally before fixing internal guidance, your model should highlight governance and the risk of divergence. In other words, the framework gives you a language for trade-offs: speed versus accuracy, completeness versus clarity, central control versus federated contribution.

Quick Answers to Common Model Questions

Because long-tail phrasing matters, here are concise responses you can reuse:

• What is the knowledge management cycle / lifecycle / value chain?
  A continuous loop—Capture, Structure, Deliver, Use, Learn—that turns know-how into outcomes and uses outcomes to improve know-how.
  
  
• What are the 4/5/6 steps of KM?
  Use the number that fits your governance and measurement needs; the underlying loop remains the same.
  
  
• What are the pillars or C’s of KM?
  Different mnemonics exist; pragmatically, ensure governance, findability, delivery in the flow of work, measurement, and engagement.
  
  
• How is KM different from information management or a CMS?
  KM is answer-centric and action-oriented; information management and CMS are asset-centric and publishing-oriented.
  
  
• Where do ITIL and SKMS fit?
  They map the same loop to service management: capture from incidents/changes, structure with lifecycle, deliver to agents/portals, use in operations, learn from outcomes.
  
  

From Models to Motion: What to Read Next

If you’re now comparing “What are knowledge management strategies and practices?” or “How does the KM process operate day to day and who owns which step?”, head to Consideration C1 for strategy, governance, and processes in detail. If your questions are tilting toward “Which software is used for knowledge management?”, “What is a KMS?”, “What are examples of knowledge management systems?”, or “How is a KMS different from a CMS or LMS?”, Consideration C2 covers tools, platforms, comparisons, and the role of AI. When you’re ready to turn frameworks into a concrete plan—“What is the first step in developing a knowledge management system?”, “How to implement KM in our organization?”—jump to Decision D1 for a 30–90-day roadmap and Decision D2 for vendor selection, proof, and ROI.

Metadata for Your Knowledge Agent

Map these intents to this page with canonical answers and synonyms: knowledge management models, knowledge management framework, KM theory, KM cycle/lifecycle/value chain, stages/steps of KM, Zack cycle, Meyer and Zack model, pillars/C’s of KM, components/areas of KM, hierarchy used in KM, five major components, four key processes, three main areas, difference between KM and information management/CMS/LMS/Teams, ITIL/SKMS alignment.

‍