The data collection process was conducted between 18 June 2024 and 24 June 2024 using the Scopus database. The data collection phase aimed to find the top-cited research articles that studied the CI discipline. As such, the search string used was ‘competitive intelligence’, with the only limitations being that the sources needed to be in English and the words CI had to be present in the article titles. This was done to ensure that the studies analysed had a deep focus on CI. The oldest article in the database was from 1959, highlighting the far-reaching importance of the practice. However, this article was not among the highest cited, possibly because of the belief that the knowledge contained might be outdated, as CI is a constantly evolving practice. Out of the 822 articles, only articles from the last 3 years (2022–2024) were considered for determining the future of CI work.

Using a research information system (RIS) file, the bibliographic data of the sources identified were imported into VosViewer to produce the visualisation depicted in Figure 2. This visualisation offers a clear illustration of the most used keywords, which reflect the focus of the CI research, using occurrences and link strength. When the link has a positive numerical value, the strength of the relationship is realised. Higher values are assigned to stronger relationships.

For instance, in terms of co-authorship analysis, the number of publications in which two countries share authorship is indicated by the strength of their association. The strength of a country’s co-authorship relationship with other countries is represented by the overall link strength. Additionally, the number of publications where two keywords are jointly present is indicated by the intensity of the association between the keywords in the co-occurrence analysis.

The authors considered all 92 countries connected to the 1469 authors when analysing co-authorship. The nations were determined to belong to seven continents: North America, Oceania, Asia, Europe, Africa, South America and the Middle East, by examining co-citation relationships between the countries.

With the minimum number of occurrences set at five, 54 of the 1575 keywords met the criterion for assessing link strength. Through the use of overlay visualisations, the authors were able to ascertain the frequency, link strength and average number of publications per year. Based on the colour of a keyword, the average publishing year was determined using the scale provided in the VosViewer overlay visualisation. This visualisation informed that the research landscape transformed in 2018, moving SM, BD and BDA into the spotlight as critical driving forces at the very heart of CI investigations.

The importance of CI cannot be overstated. The practice examines the competitiveness of an organisation, necessitating enterprise-wide involvement rather than limiting it to the marketing department. Every human resource should understand the complexity of the process and should work towards adding effective competitive strategy building and organisational success (Štefániková & Masárová 2013:671). In a time when markets are at capacity, the best way for existing organisations to ensure continuity is to expand their existing market share using practices such as CI.

Globalisation and the rapid advancements in technology have intensified competition, driving firms to adopt new technologies should they want to be competitive (Macpherson, Werner & Mey 2022:1; Sackey, Bester & Adams 2017:117). Competitive intelligence and KM are functions that support the competitiveness of organisations through enhancing strategic decision-making. As Ghannay and Mamlouk (2012:23) state, sustained competitive advantage is critically dependent on acquiring knowledge. While KM and CI are often treated as separate disciplines, both are considered essential to the success of businesses across various sectors (Chawinga & Chipeta 2017:27). Taib et al. (2008:31) and Ghannay and Mamlouk (2012) asserted that although KM and CI are distinct disciplines, they are both complementary and synergistic, sharing similar objectives and functions as natural extensions of one another.

There is continued convergence between KM and CI, as the distinctions between the two fields continue to blur. Ghannay and Mamlouk (2012:24) reported that KM and CI are strategic tools that help create a competitive advantage. Erickson and Rothberg (2012:16) added that the improved management of knowledge leads to a competitive advantage. Knowledge management is integral for CI professionals to ensure accuracy and to better guide the various phases of strategy implementation (Shujahat et al. 2017:55).

Information and data are the commonalities that tie KM and CI together. Competitive intelligence collects data to create intelligence and support organisational decisions, while KM systems organise the resultant intelligence, alongside other internal and external sources (Nitse & Parker 2002:396) for ease of access. Johnson (2005:303) mentioned that the technologies that KM brings forth contribute to CI’s strategic efficiency and effectiveness. Knowledge management and CI, when combined, deliver targeted information to decision-makers when needed (Ghannay & Mamlouk 2012:31).

The relationship between CI and KM has become a way for organisations to gain a competitive advantage (Johnson 2005:303). The only limitation for CI practitioners has been the ability to access the knowledge. Additionally, Nitse and Parker (2002:396) provided that issues such as information credibility, focus, quantity, shallowness, sharing and timeliness were identified by users of CI regarding the intelligence supplied to them by CI professionals. Additional CI challenges included decision lag, data overload and the lack of necessary organisational values and innovation support.

Knowledge management components can help resolve the above-mentioned issues (Esmaeili, Mousavi & Beyranvand 2015:1862). Hence, there is a need for KM practitioners to support CI work, as KM is fundamentally concerned with the identification, organisation, codification and sharing of an organisation’s knowledge assets (Taib et al. 2008:29). Knowledge management can improve compliance, assist with innovation and product exchange, enhance efficiency and develop a conducive organisational culture. Knowledge management delivers the right information to the right people when needed for decisions and can thus assist in maintaining competitiveness (Nitse & Parker 2002:396).

Knowledge management streamlines data from multiple sources by enabling indexing and search capabilities (Nitse & Parker 2002:396). Both disciplines aim to evaluate business decisions, locate and deliver relevant internal and external knowledge and ultimately help decision-makers interpret the knowledge (Ghannay & Mamlouk 2012:31). Oladejo and Osofisan (2011:590) stated that KM enables CI-produced intelligence to be reused and distributed to decision-makers, analysts and project leaders across all intelligence phases.

Knowledge management methods enable effective information use by systematically organising, preserving and sharing existing knowledge (explicit and tacit) while anticipating future needs. This makes KM essential for CI, as both interconnect through information processing (Oladejo & Osofisan 2011:55). Ghannay and Mamlouk (2012:31) argued that an organisation’s future hinges on strategically transforming knowledge into actionable CI.

Though KM and CI differ in focus, they share core goals such as managing information overload and enabling targeted analysis, making them complementary forces. According to Chawinga and Chipeta (2017:28), KM focuses on managing internal knowledge processes to ensure that the necessary knowledge for decision-making is readily accessible and efficiently utilised. In contrast, CI emphasises the collection and analysis of data from a wide range of external sources to support strategic decision-making and gain a competitive advantage.

Given their complementary roles – KM focusing internally and CI focusing externally – it can be argued that integrating both approaches within an enterprise can yield greater strategic value and enhance organisational effectiveness. Synergy leads to greater combined effects, which can be seen by linking KM and CI rather than keeping them separate. As the fields have some similarities, they have the potential to complement each other through KM organising and sharing internal knowledge and CI gathering competitor data (Taib et al. 2008:31).

Knowledge management and CI operate on two different levels but will inevitably integrate (Tang & Li 2010:1). The integration and combination of the two functions, referred to as KM-CI, can result in the delivery of relevant intelligence to the most appropriate decision-makers at the most appropriate time, thereby enhancing the decision-making process (Chawinga & Chipeta 2017:28). Given the close relation seen in the literature, it can be argued that KM and CI are natural partners and ought to collaborate (Johnson 2005:304). Both disciplines ultimately aim to ensure that critical insights are delivered to strategic decision-makers in a timely and actionable manner (Taib et al. 2008:29). As highlighted by Taib et al. (2008:31) and Ghannay and Mamlouk (2012:24), it is at this convergence where internal intelligence and external intelligence inform strategic choices that KM and CI meet at a pivotal intersection.

Knowledge management enhances the value of information already available within the organisation, while CI focuses on gathering and interpreting relevant data from the external environment. When integrated, these two functions can produce a competitive advantage. Specifically, KM seeks to optimise internal expertise and knowledge assets, whereas CI filters and analyses external data to understand the complex nature of the competitive landscape and to identify emerging trends (Chawinga & Chipeta 2017:28). Thus, the claim of this study is that KM practitioners should take it upon themselves to understand the future focuses of CI to better contribute to and drive CI for increased business effectiveness.

Ethical clearance to conduct this study was obtained from the University of Johannesburg’s School of Consumer Intelligence and Information Systems Research Ethics Committee (No. 2024SCiiS092V).

Over 65 years, 822 articles on CI have been published. The oldest work was published in 1959, and many other publications have been published almost every year since then. Over the last 65 years, the publication trend has fluctuated, with some up and down years. From 1960 to 1983, there had been no publications relating to CI, while the year with the most publications was 2015, with 53 studies published.

Despite the up–down pattern, publication growth has been consistent, with publications increasing in both up and down years. For example, there were 18 publications in 1995, but only four in 1996. However, there were 26 in 2007 and 31 in 2008. The trend continues, with 38 in 2012 and 51 in 2013; 37 and 53 were released in 2014 and 2015, respectively; and 45 and 27 were released in 2021 and 2022, respectively. In 2023, 37 papers were published, but only 14 were published in 2024 at the time of data collection (between 18 and 24 June 2024). The data revealed that later years have more publications than earlier years; however, there are fluctuations in the number of publications, thus not indicating a consistent growth in CI publications. As a result of the continued fluctuation, it can be expected that 2025 will have more than 14 publications that entail CI.

Because of the widespread relevance of CI across industries, it made sense why the same trend was realised when assessing the industries in which the included studies were conducted. It was found that the work published was focused on 15 industries. In some cases, articles focused on more than one industry. For example, the article by Tajdini (2022) touches on both the business and technology industries as it analyses how technology-driven consumer data impact business outcomes.

The most prevalent industry was the business industry, with 14 articles coming from this industry. The articles focused on innovation, strategic decision-making and organisational performance and development. For example, the study by Wu, Yan and Umair (2023) focused on how CI impacted the ability of small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to adapt and prosper in competitive business environments. Additionally, Rahma and Mekimah (2023) stated that their study was driven by CI’s role in facilitating organisational learning to enhance organisational performance.

Additional prevalent industries were the technology and academic industries, found in 13 and seven articles, respectively. The technology studies mainly focused on creating CI models and systems or enhancing existing models and systems using AI. For example, in the study by Bouktaib and Abdelhadi (2022), the authors proposed including a BD analytics layer in CI systems. On the contrary, the articles that were academic discussed theories and literature surrounding the understanding of the use and application of CI systems and processes.

Other industries included finance, health care, property and tourism with three articles; the fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG), insurance and marketing industries were represented in two articles each and the agriculture, energy, retail and telecommunications industries were seen in one article each. Ultimately, the organisations in these industries used CI to monitor their competitors’ moves in the market and to identify threats and opportunities to adapt their strategies, set prices, develop products, target customers, mitigate risks and gain a competitive advantage.

Analysis revealed that the top 10 most prevalent journals were published by nine distinct publishers (see Table 1). Springer Nature had the most publications with two journals followed by every other publisher with just one each. In terms of the articles relating to CI, the Lecture Notes in Computer Science, which included the subseries Lecture Notes in AI and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics journal, had the most cited article – ‘U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation’, with 52 358 citations.

According to the CiteScore 2023 report, only one journal (IEEE Engineering Management Review) (7.4) had a score of five and above, making it the journal with the highest CiteScore. On the contrary, Ciencia Da Informacao had the lowest, scoring 0.1. Hamburger (2020) suggested that a CiteScore indicates the value of a journal. The higher the score, the greater the value. The CiteScore denotes that Scopus views Ciencia Da Informacao as the least valuable journal among the top 10 journals. Nevertheless, it is imperative that publishers not only take the CiteScore into account but also consider the journal’s capacity to reach the appropriate target audience.

In Table 1, TP refers to total publications, and TC refers to total citations. The total publications refer to those related to CI and not the journal’s entire publication history. However, the citations represent the journal’s entire citation history. Times cited speak to the number of times the most cited article was referenced.

Table 2 presents the countries that are leading in terms of their total publications (total publications per country [TPC]) focusing on CI. The table also highlights the leading country’s most productive academic institution and the institution’s total publications (total publications per institution [TPI]). As can be seen, the United States (US) was the leading country with the highest number of publications relating to CI at 149 publications. The University of Pittsburgh was the most productive institution in the US, contributing seven publications. Following the US was China, with 115 total publications, where Wuhan University was the most productive academic institution with nine publications. Although the US was leading in terms of total publications, it was observed that the most productive institution in China outperformed the most productive one in the United States.

When analysing co-authorship between countries, the researchers required countries to have published at least five documents, which reduced the results from 92 to 33 countries. There were 57 total links, and the total link strength was 127. The top three collaborators were the US, China and Brazil, with South Africa coming in fourth place. From 149 articles, the US had 14 links. This finding meant that 9.4% of the articles published in the US were collaborated on with other countries. While China was second in terms of total publications contributed, it had a total of seven links. Therefore, the percentile representation in terms of articles collaborated on was 6.09%. Brazil came in third with total publications contributed and had a total of six links (11.86%). Although South Africa was fourth in terms of total articles contributed, it had seven links, indicating a higher collaboration percentage than the top three countries, with 12.73% of the work being collaborated on. It can also be assumed that authors from China believed less in international collaborative research than the other top three.

Studies on CI were found to be published mostly by authors from institutions not mentioned in the 2025 top 100 institutions on the Webometrics list. Table 3 provides the institutions’ global ranking list, where only two institutions were in the top 100. This was perhaps because researchers from top institutions turned their focus to other research areas. However, the finding does not minimise the importance of CI as it is widely practised to deliver a competitive advantage (Victoria 2020).

Table 4 lists the authors who had the most contributions towards the study of CI. The list is made up of the top 15 authors from eight different countries, namely the Czech Republic, the United Kingdom and Latvia, with one author from each. Portugal, Morocco and the US had two authors each. Lastly, South Africa and France had three authors each. The top three authors with the most publications are from Portugal, France and the US. Most publications were from the Universidade Nova de Lisboa in Lisbon, Portugal, by Castelli, M., with 202 publications, 3813 total citations and an h-index of 30 (a metric designed to evaluate both the research output and scholarly impact of an individual researcher or a collective) (MD Anderson Cancer Center 2025). In second place was Dou, H.J.M., affiliated with Aix Marseille Université with 75 total publications, an h-index of 14 and 672 total citations. In third place, from the Debbie and Jerry Ivy College of Business in Ames, US, was Agnihotri, R., who had 73 publications, an h-index of 29 and 3523 total citations. The list is made up of mostly authors from Europe (eight authors) ranked 1, 2, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14 and 15, followed by five authors from Africa ranked 4, 6, 7, 12 and 13 and then two authors from North America ranked 3 and 5. The two authors from North America are both from the US. The suggestion is that CI is mostly valued in Europe and South Africa, and therefore, KM and CI practitioners should make European contacts where CI is concerned to improve their understanding of the practice.

A total of 1575 author keyword co-occurrences were identified, among which 54 co-occurred at least five times, which was the threshold set for map generation in VosViewer (see Figure 2); 70 keywords co-occurred four times, 124 keywords co-occurred three times and 285 keywords co-occurred two times.

Data revealed that the commonly utilised keyword was CI, with 406 occurrences and a link strength of 363. The second and third most used keywords were KM (39 occurrences and the total link strength of 79) and competitive advantage (30 occurrences and the total link strength of 57). The frequency of the keyword occurrences of KM further purports the need for KM practitioners to contribute to CI work as CI practitioners acknowledge KM. Business intelligence and text mining rounded up the top five keywords used with 28 and 17 occurrences and total link strengths of 46 and 27, respectively. These keywords also highlighted the topics of interest.