If you introduce Knowledge Management after Knowledge Retention and Traceability, the actual knowledge producers will be more active partners in setting up and negotiating the separation of roles and structuring of the knowledge infrastructure.
This increased participation will result in a greater control on what is inside your “knowledge store”, as the knowledge management organizational unit will not be the only organizational structure in charge of all tasks related to knowledge management.
If the Knowledge Management organization is in place before the rest of the organization is able to provide usable knowledge, the net result is usually an “ivory tower” approach.
Should this be the case, the Knowledge Management organization, for lack of contacts with sources that understand its “lingo”, starts generating knowledge and assumptions, instead of structuring knowledge produced by the actual Knowledge Providers.
In turn, this will give less incentive to the other organizational units to become part of a process that adds overhead but whose value (i.e. knowledge that can be extracted and reused) is questionable.
Of course: a better alternative is to clearly “phase-in” such an organization, by assigning it an advisory role to business units during the first phase of its activity.
Knowledge Management based on Knowledge Retention also simplifies the identification of “core” knowledge items, whose understanding should be kept inside your organization.
These “core” items are those relevant to ensure that any “outsourcing” activity does not affect your business continuity.