Purpose ‐ The purpose of this study is to conduct a scientometric analysis of the body of literature contained in 11 major knowledge management and intellectual capital (KM/IC) peer-reviewed journals.Design/methodology/approach ‐ A total of 2,175 articles published in 11 major KM/IC peer-reviewed journals were carefully reviewed and subjected to scientometric data analysis techniques.Findings ‐ A number of research questions pertaining to country, institutional and individual productivity, co-operation patterns, publication frequency, and favourite inquiry methods were proposed and answered. Based on the findings, many implications emerged that improve one's understanding of the identity of KM/IC as a distinct scientific field.Research limitations/implications ‐ The pool of KM/IC journals examined did not represent all available publication outlets, given that at least 20 peer-reviewed journals exist in the KM/IC field. There are also KM/IC papers published in other non-KM/IC specific journals. However, the 11 journals that were selected for the study have been evaluated by Bontis and Serenko as the top publications in the KM/IC area.Practical implications ‐ Practitioners have played a significant role in developing the KM/IC field. However, their contributions have been decreasing. There is still very much a need for qualitative descriptions and case studies. It is critically important that practitioners consider collaborating with academics for richer research projects.Originality/value ‐ This is the most comprehensive scientometric analysis of the KM/IC field ever conducted.