Abstarct: A review of the knowledge management (KM) literature reveals many different definitions and perspectives on knowledge and knowledge management. Here, we provide an overview of some of this discourse. Knowledge, as defined by Plato and accepted by most Western philosophers, is “justified true belief.” Information is a closely related term and is generally assumed to be data that is of potential value in decision making. According to Brown and Duguid, there are at least three important distinctions between information and knowledge: knowledge entails a knower; knowledge is much harder to detach, transfer, and share than information; and knowledge is much harder to assimilate and understand than information. Nonaka and Takeuchi describe differences in how Westerners and Japanese often view knowledge. They espouse that Japanese view knowledge as being primarily tacit, something not easily seen or expressible. Western culture has a strong focus on explicit knowledge, which can be expressed in words and numbers and is more easily communicated than tacit knowledge. They describe the contrast between these perceptions on knowledge as being rooted in culture. In the Western culture, there has been a long history of separating knowledge from the knower, whereas this is not the situation in Japanese traditions. Very important to the concept of knowledge is that of knowing. Knowing and learning capture the dynamic aspects of knowledge. A knower, one who is knowing, can be said to possess “actionable knowledge.” Miller and Morris suggest that knowledge is gained when theory, information, and experience are integrated. In this present study attempt to identify factors affecting each of the stages of knowledge management which includes creating, documenting, sharing, making available and using knowledge. Continue to review this issue further, a comparison between the views of elite knowledge management and Saipa industrial Group Managers regarding the significance of the coefficient of each of these factors.