Search results

The purpose of this paper is to formulate an analytical framework for the information concept based on the semiotic theory.

The paper is motivated by the apparent controversy that still surrounds the information concept. Information, being a key concept within LIS, suffers from being anchored in various incompatible theories. The paper suggests that information is signs, and it demonstrates how the concept of information can be understood within C.S. Peirce’s phenomenologically rooted semiotic. Hence, from there, certain ontological conditions as well epistemological consequences of the information concept can be deduced.

The paper argues that an understanding of information, as either objective or subjective/discursive, leads to either objective reductionism and signal processing, that fails to explain how information becomes meaningful at all, or conversely, information is understood only relative to subjective/discursive intentions, agendas, etc. To overcome the limitations of defining information as either objective or subjective/discursive, a semiotic analysis shows that information understood as signs is consistently sensitive to both objective and subjective/discursive features of information. It is consequently argued that information as concept should be defined in relation to ontological conditions having certain epistemological consequences.

The paper presents an analytical framework, derived from semiotics, that adds to the developments of the philosophical dimensions of information within LIS.

This study aims to investigate the implications of applying critical realism to the study of organizational learning. It considers critical realism as an alternate theoretical science foundation to the domains of empirical realism and social constructivism that characterize most of the field of organizational learning.

This study adopts the approach of a philosophical/conceptual discussion.

This study finds that the critical realist approach makes it possible for organizational learning researchers to apply a prescriptive change agenda. It requires researchers to study the context in which organizational learning occurs. These two features enable the researcher to propose what the world must be like for organizational learning to occur. Hence, a critical realist foundation moves organizational learning theory a step closer to its theoretical sibling, the learning organization.

This study reveals the potential in applying critical realism to the study of organizational learning and identifies its related strengths.

There are five factors acting as a barrier to the effective evaluation of educational technology (edtech), which are as follows: premature timing, inappropriate techniques, rapid change, complexity of context and inconsistent terminology. The purpose of this paper is to identify new evaluation approaches that will address these and reflect on the evaluation imperative for complex technology initiatives.

An initial investigation of traditional evaluative approaches used within the technology domain was broadened to investigate the evaluation practices within social and public policy domains. Realist evaluation, a branch of theory-based evaluation, was identified and reviewed in detail. The realist approach was then refined, proposing two additional necessary steps to support mapping the technical complexity of initiatives.

A refined illustrative example of a realist evaluation framework is presented, including two novel architectural edtech domain reference models to support mapping.

Recommendations include building individual evaluator capacity; adopting the realist framework; the use of architectural edtech domain reference models; phased evaluation to first build theories in technology “context” and then iteratively during complex implementation chains; and community contribution to a shared map of technical and organisational complexity.

This paper makes a novel contribution by arguing the imperative for a theory-based realist approach to help redefine evaluative thinking within the IT and complex system domain. It becomes an innovative proposal with the addition of two domain reference models that tailor the approach for edtech. Its widespread adoption will help build a shared evidence base that synthesizes and surfaces “what works, for whom, in which contexts and why”, benefiting educators, IT managers, funders, policymakers and future learners.

This study, a conceptual paper, aims an answer the question, how significant cluster ambidexterity is for the resilience of individual clusters.

The authors draw up an abductive synopsis of empirical information and relevant theoretical sources. A case study is used to illustrate some of the findings.

The results of the analysis show that the ambidexterity of a cluster can contribute to its resilience when adverse external developments arise. Ambidexterity proves to be simultaneously a common strategy of key cluster actors and a mechanism for coping with critical situations and developments that can be activated by the cluster actors and may – eventually – lead to cluster resilience. While ambidexterity does not guarantee cluster survival, it can contribute significantly to their economic resilience under adverse conditions.

The concept is developed on a limited empirical basis and would need to be tested and deepened by comparing a wide range of case studies from different clusters.

A better understanding of the importance of ambidexterity for the development of industrial clusters contributes to a better fine-tuning of cluster support policies.

Ambidexterity as a concept originating from business administration has so far only been rudimentarily tapped for empirical and theoretical cluster research. The paper identifies and develops a path how this could be accomplished to a greater extent in the future.