Internet communities are a typical space for knowledge creation and use on the Internet as people discuss their common interests within the internet communities. When we define 'Knowledge Communities' as internet communities that are related to knowledge creation and use, they are categorized into 4 different types such as 'Search Engine,' 'Open Communities,' 'Specialty Communities,' and 'Activity Communities.' Each type of knowledge community does not remain the same, for example. Rather, it changes with time and is also affected by the external business environment. Therefore, it is critical to develop processes for practical use of such changeable knowledge communities. Yet there is little research regarding a strategic framework for knowledge communities as a source of knowledge creation and use. The purposes of this study are (1) to find factors that can affect knowledge creation and use for each type of knowledge community and (2) to develop a strategic framework for practical use of the knowledge communities. Based on previous research, we found 7 factors that have considerable impacts on knowledge creation and use. They were 'Fitness,' 'Reliability,' 'Systemicity,' 'Richness,' 'Similarity,' 'Feedback,' and 'Understanding.' We created 30 different questions from each type of knowledge community. The questions included common sense, IT, business and hobbies, and were uniformly selected from various knowledge communities. Instead of using survey, we used these questions to ask users of the 4 representative web sites such as Google from Search Engine, NAVER Knowledge iN from Open Communities, SLRClub from Specialty Communities, and Wikipedia from Activity Communities. These 4 representative web sites were selected based on popularity (i.e., the 4 most popular sites in Korea). They were also among the 4 most frequently mentioned sitesin previous research. The answers of the 30 knowledge questions were collected and evaluated by the 11 IT experts who have been working for IT companies more than 3 years. When evaluating, the 11 experts used the above 7 knowledge factors as criteria. Using a stepwise linear regression for the evaluation of the 7 knowledge factors, we found that each factors affects differently knowledge creation and use for each type of knowledge community. The results of the stepwise linear regression analysis showed the relationship between 'Understanding' and other knowledge factors. The relationship was different regarding the type of knowledge community. The results indicated that 'Understanding' was significantly related to 'Reliability' at 'Search Engine type', to 'Fitness' at 'Open Community type', to 'Reliability' and 'Similarity' at 'Specialty Community type', and to 'Richness' and 'Similarity' at 'Activity Community type'. A strategic framework was created from the results of this study and such framework can be useful for knowledge communities that are not stable with time. For the success of knowledge community, the results of this study suggest that it is essential to ensure there are factors that can influence knowledge communities. It is also vital to reinforce each factor has its unique influence on related knowledge community. Thus, these changeable knowledge communities should be transformed into an adequate type with proper business strategies and objectives. They also should be progressed into a type that covers varioustypes of knowledge communities. For example, DCInside started from a small specialty community focusing on digital camera hardware and camerawork and then was transformed to an open community focusing on social issues through well-known photo galleries. NAVER started from a typical search engine and now covers an open community and a special community through additional web services such as NAVER knowledge iN, NAVER Cafe, and NAVER Blog. NAVER is currently competing withan activity community such as Wikipedia through the NAVER encyclopedia that provides similar services with NAVER encyclopedia's users as Wikipedia does. Finally, the results of this study provide meaningfully practical guidance for practitioners in that which type of knowledge community is most appropriate to the fluctuated business environment as knowledge community itself evolves with time.