Search results

This article aims at contributing to the development of a Marxist theory of the production of knowledge, and in particular of natural sciences and techniques (NST), under capitalism. It rejects the double critique that the labor theory of value has become obsolete under modern capitalism and that Marx’s theoretical structure cannot accommodate mental production. The paper starts with two preliminary sections. First, some relevant aspects of dialectics as a tool of social research are submitted. Then, notions such as Information Society or Service Society are debunked. On this basis, the production of individual and of social knowledge is inquired into and the conditions for knowledge production to be production of (surplus) value are analyzed. Next, the question is tackled as to why and how this knowledge (and in particular NST) is functional for the interests of the capitalist class, even though in a contradictory way. Several examples are provided. Particular attention is paid to the computer and to biotechnology and genetic engineering. The most common objections against the thesis of the class determination of knowledge are dealt with. It is argued that class determination of knowledge can explain why the science and techniques developed in one society and by one class can be used in other societies and by other classes. Examples are provided of trans-class and trans-epochal elements of knowledge. Finally, the last section submits that a radically different type of NST can originate only from a radically different type of society, based on radically different production relations.

This chapter attempts to theorize the role of knowledge in the determination of the value of commodities. This draws from the South Korean controversy on the value and price of information commodities such as computer software and digital music. One group of writers has argued that the value of software copies (=commodities) is contributed by the labor time expended to produce the source code (=knowledge) in a piecemeal fashion. For another group, the source code has nothing to do with the production of the value of copies given that the source code is unnecessary for the (re)production of copies, and thus the value of software copies is approximately zero and its price is a high monopoly price. Both approaches are flawed. In the case of the former, no value can actually be transferred from the source code to copies because no changes are made to the source code before or after the production of copies. In case of the latter, knowledge is viewed as having nothing to do with value production. On the basis of this critique, an alternative view is put forward, in which knowledge plays an important role in value production by determining the productivity and/or complexity of labor. Knowledge “virtually intensifies” labor. It is also argued that intellectual property rights should be theorized in a way to refine and reproduce the role of knowledge – the virtual intensification of labor – at more complex and concrete levels of analysis.

This paper enhances our understanding of how national culture impacts manufacturing performance (assembly speed, consistency between teams, etc.) during a production process move. The authors also investigate the efficacy of co-location as a strategy to enhance knowledge transfer from one organization to another.

To study the impact of national culture on production process moves, the authors develop and employ a team-based behavioral experiment within and between an individualist society (the United States) and a collectivist one (China). The authors also examine the impact of co-location on knowledge transfer effectiveness within and between these two unique cultures.

Interestingly, co-location has little impact on the performance of US recipient teams. Without co-location, Chinese recipient team performance lags significantly behind the US teams. However, firms can overcome these knowledge transfer challenges by co-locating source and recipient team members. These results suggest that firms should assess the national cultural context when considering co-location to manage their production move. There are contexts where co-location may be incredibly useful to facilitate an effective knowledge transfer (e.g. collectivist cultures like China) and contexts where this approach may not be as valuable (e.g. individualistic cultures such as the United States).

This research contributes to the academic literature in several ways. First, while past research demonstrates that national culture can be an essential barrier to information and knowledge sharing, this paper extends these findings showing that co-location may effectively overcome this barrier. After the authors offer and test the merits of co-location, they also establish the boundary conditions of this approach by showing that the effect of co-location on knowledge transfer is contingent on the cultural context. This contribution enhances our understanding of the relationship between national culture and knowledge sharing and has implications for managers developing approaches to transfer knowledge between cultures. Second, the authors develop and execute a novel cross-country experimental design. While cross-country experiments have been done before (e.g. Ozer et al. 2014, Kuwabara et al. 2007, etc.), it is still rare to see such experiments due to them being “technically difficult and costly” (Ozer et al. 2014, p. 2437). This research not only offer insights into how teams of people from individualist and collectivist societies send, receive and comprehend production knowledge. It also documents how these teams convert this knowledge into production results.

This paper seeks to address the importance of knowledge production and capabilities for the construction industry; and the implications of the challenges associated with their effective exploitation for the construction industry in China.

A thorough review of extant literature and 31 detailed semi‐structured interviews with practitioners from 14 large, medium and small organisations in the UK construction industry. Content analysis was adopted as the analytical approach.

The main triggers of knowledge production in the construction industry are: the need to effectively deal with complex projects; the effective use of new, innovative building materials, systems, services; managing change (both project change and organisational change); coping with the uniqueness of projects; and managing team member interfaces (e.g. consultant‐contractor). Knowledge production is a complex process which can occur through a number of ways (e.g. formal research, reflective practice, transformation and combination of existing knowledge). Organisational culture influences knowledge production both positively and negatively.

This paper addresses the main ways in which knowledge production can benefit construction organisations and can impact positively to organisational innovations. It addresses the role of leadership and culture in knowledge production in organisations. Skilled and competent workforce is key in knowledge production, especially in addressing problem‐solving situations. Appropriate and focused training programmes (e.g. continuing professional development events, other short courses, in‐house programmes‐mentoring, coaching, and job rotation) are important in stimulating approaches for improved knowledge production in organisations. As shortages of skilled personnel are rife in construction in China, organisations need to take the issue of knowledge production more seriously.

The purpose of this paper is to present research work based on the authors’ conceptual framework reported in the VRAP Conference 2013. It is related with an efficient method to obtain an optimal part build orientation for additive manufacturing (AM) by using AM features with associated AM production knowledge and multi-attribute decision-making (MADM). The paper also emphasizes the importance of AM feature and the implied AM knowledge in AM process planning.

To solve the orientation problem in AM, two sub-tasks, the generation of a set of alternative orientations and the identification of an optimal one within the generated list, should be accomplished. In this paper, AM feature is defined and associated with AM production knowledge to be used for generating a set of alternative orientations. Key attributes for the decision-making of the orientation problem are then identified and used to represent those generated orientations. Finally, an integrated MADM model is adopted to find out the optimal orientation among the generated alternative orientations.

The proposed method to find out an optimal part build orientation for those parts with simple or medium complex geometric shapes is reasonable and efficient. It also has the potential to deal with more complex parts with cellular or porous structures in a short time by using high-performance computers.

The proposed method is a proof-of-concept. There is a need to investigate AM feature types and the association with related AM production knowledge further so as to suite the context of orientating parts with more complex geometric features. There are also research opportunities for developing more advanced algorithms to recognize AM features and generate alternative orientations and refine alternative orientations.

AM feature is defined and introduced to the orientation problem in AM for generating the alternative orientations. It is also used as one of the key attributes for decision-making so as to help express production requirements on specific geometric features of a desired part.

The main objective of this article is to show the increasing relevance of the knowledge production capability of information storage and retrieval systems in the context of ‘perpetual innovation’, otherwise known as the ‘information’ economy. The knowledge production potential of information retrieval systems is only barely recognised in the information science community. Traditionally, information professionals and retrieval systems devised by them are conceived merely as guardians and facilitators of knowledge. This prevents information professionals playing a key role in an innovation based economy. In a perpetual innovation economy, information/knowledge embedded in commodities becomes the main source of profit. However, the peculiar character of information/knowledge means that privately owned knowledge tends to flow back into the public domain. This peculiarity necessitates continuous production of new knowledge applied to products and production techniques. Creative acts are not individualistic but collective/collaborative processes. Emerging collaborative systems on computer networks, such as the Internet, make it possible to devise work environments that are conducive to the development and cultivation of collective practices. Informational retrieval systems designers and practitioners may find it useful to study such systems to develop retrieval mechanisms that enhance creativity and facilitate knowledge production as well as knowledge transfer. It is hoped that by putting information retrieval in the context of the perpetual innovation economy, the knowledge production potential of information retrieval systems becomes more widely acknowledged and accepted among information practitioners.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how low-technology corporate ventures use knowledge from multiple and often trans-sectoral fields to intensively create and deploy innovative production technologies in order to sustain significant competitive advantages.

The paper primarily draws evidence from an exploratory case study of a low-tech private enterprise operating in the wood processing industry in Greece.

Low-technology firms appear to invest mainly in process innovation and therefore production technologies, in order to secure a position within mature markets. Within the notion of knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship (KIE), a creative bricolage of knowledge based on research work and industrial practice results in innovative products and processes covering technologies from a wide range, including high-tech industries. The case indicates that low-tech companies may be something more than just “borrowers” of technology.

The limitations regard the single case study research design and the focus on the wood industry in Greece. Future research may pursue more case studies in different traditional sectors and national contexts.

Entrepreneurs and managers of low-technology firms should focus on technological innovation and more specifically on co-creation of novel production technologies in order to sustain strong competitive advantages and enhance performances.

The analysis challenges the established opinion of common entrepreneurial processes in low-tech sectors. It adds to the ongoing discussion of low-tech, KIE and it contributes to the literature of industrial dynamics since there are only a handful of studies that probe the role of production technologies within a low-tech but knowledge-intensive context.

The purpose of the paper is to challenge and address the limitations of the traditional system of knowledge production that is embedded in disaster and climate change research studies, and research studies in general. It argues that knowledge production in research processes conforms to colonialist thinking or west-inspired approaches. Such a system often results in the omission of crucial information due to a lack of participation, inclusion and diversity in knowledge production.

The paper proposes practices and recommendations to decolonise knowledge production in disaster and climate change research studies, and research studies in general. It provides a brief literature review on the concepts of decolonisation of knowledge and epistemological freedom, and its origins; assesses the need for knowledge decolonisation, emphasising on the integration of local knowledge from grassroots women-led initiatives in instances where disasters and crises are being investigated in vulnerable communities, especially in the Global South; and finally the paper proposes to decolonise knowledge production through activating co-learning and co-production. The practices have been developed from the work of relevant authors in the field and case studies.

Through a brief literature review on previous discourses on the topic of knowledge decolonisation and analysis of recent case studies on disaster and crisis management and community resilience, the paper finds that there exists a lack of pluralism and inclusion in epistemology which limits the pursuit to obtain the whole truth in the production of knowledge in research studies.

This paper adds to the discussion of decolonisation of knowledge in the field of disaster and climate change research studies, and research processes in general. It provides in-depth analyses of recent case studies of emerging community resilience and local practices that were crucial in the face of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis.

This paper emphasizes that production workers achieve empowerment through participation in processes of innovation and through a collaborative partnership with the sources of design knowledge in a company (including engineers and managers). An alternative reading of Taylor’s Principles of Scientific Management suggests that empowerment ultimately depends on the distribution and use of knowledge. By including promising theory from the literature and a few examples from industry and field study, the author concludes that to create effective opportunities for empowerment on the factory floor, knowledge development for production workers must move beyond the confines of routine continuous improvement and beyond efficiency‐based logic and reach into the realms of innovation that define the very paradigms of production.

Research in business processes has been developed around a disciplinary approach toward the production of traditional knowledge, known as Mode 1. The problems studied with this approach are solved in a context in which academic knowledge prevails, with no major concerns regarding its practical applicability. Thus, the purpose of this paper is to propose a structure for knowledge production based on Mode 2 for business process researches.

A bibliometric research was conducted to define and conceptualize the classes of disciplinary problems, by assessing the years 2007-2012 of the Business Process Management Journal publications.

A framework for the Mode 2 knowledge production was proposed in the development of research in business process and conceptualized classes of problems related to this issue.

This work was carried out with specific focus on research in business process, so the defined classes of problems cannot be generalized.

The studies identified by this research are in the form of a disciplinary approach toward the production of traditional knowledge, known as Mode 1. This paper aims to fill the gap of a transdisciplinary production of knowledge and practical application, known as Mode 2 in the context of business process.