Search results

This paper aims to consider ways to visually model data generated by qualitative case studies, pointing out a need for visualizations that depict both synchronic relations across representations and how those relations change diachronically. To develop an appropriate modeling approach, the paper critically examines Max Boisot’s I-Space model, a conceptual model for understanding the interplay among knowledge assets used by a population. I-Space maps information in three dimensions (abstraction, codification and diffusion). It is not directly adoptable for case study methodology due to three fundamental disjunctures: in theory, methodology and unit of analysis. However, it can be adapted for qualitative research by substituting analogues for abstraction, codification and diffusion.

Using an example from early-stage technology entrepreneurship, this paper first reviews network, flow and matrix models used to systematically visualize case study data. It then presents Boisot’s I-Space model and critiques it from the perspective of qualitative workplace studies. Finally, it adapts the model using measures that have been used in qualitative case studies.

This paper notes three limitations of the I-Space model when applied to empirical cases of workplace learning. Its theory of information does not account well for how people use representations synchronically for learning. It is a conceptual framework, and the tentative attempts to use it for mapping representations have been used in workshops, not for systematically collected data. It does not adequately bound a case for analysis. Thus, it can be applied analogically but not directly for mapping representations in qualitative case studies.

This paper identifies a possible way to develop I-Space for strategically mapping representations in qualitative case studies, using measures analogous to the I-Space axes to reflect observable behavior.

In providing a methodological critique for one model of knowledge management, this paper also develops criteria for appropriate modeling of meaningful artifacts in the context of qualitative studies of workplaces.

Boisot’s I‐space is used as a framework to explain the comparative success of computer‐based tools in information scanning and dissemi‐ nation, and the failure to support problem areas in the process of knowledge creation, especially where this involves interactions within user groups. Recent research indicates that process‐based studies are likely to be productive, and that there is a useful overlap between information science and computer science interests and methods.

Explores the connection between knowledge management (KM) and process innovation (PI). Although these are popular themes in the literature on management innovation, there is not much discussions of these issues. On the one hand, KM has been treated as a managerial fad that is mainly focused on knowledge generation, dissemination, and utilization. Moreover, the advocates of KM seem to be concerned with building knowledge management systems (KMS). On the other hand, PI is regarded as an efficiency‐oriented process redesign and re‐engineering (or BPR), which seems to be nothing to do with KM. However, the case study of Samsung SDI shows that in the real world KM is deeply linked with PI. For illustrating the KM strategy of Samsung SDI, uses the term “PI‐based KM”. Sheds light on two points: the features of process knowledge can be studied in the sense that knowledge associated with process is dubbed “process knowledge”; and socio‐cultural features of KM should be illustrated in terms of knowledge transformation path in the information space.

The purpose of this paper is to illustrate how knowledge takes effect in different software development methodologies by relating them to different knowledge cycles.

The results were find by conducing a general review about the topics of knowledge cycles and software development methodologies.

All software development methodologies have knowledge cycles. In Waterfall methodology, the cycle followed is I-Space. For “code and fix,” there is a parallel with March’s cycle. Scrum shows a parallel with SECI cycle. Among the methodological options, results show there an increase in hierarchy, documentation, processes and explicit knowledge.

Identified parallels of each methodology with knowledge cycles; established which Scrum artifacts are performed at each stage of SECI, which Waterfall steps correspond to I-Space phases and which activities in “code and fix” deal with exploration and exploitation of knowledge; and features shown increase or decrease according to the adoption of each methodology.

Results help knowledge sharing implementations and foster inter-team knowledge sharing, with the identification of the correct methodology-cycle match and the personalization of the strategy for each team based on the adopted methodology. Training for knowledge initiatives can be improved by determining how knowledge-sharing activities are incorporated on the determined series of actions established by the methodologies adopted on the firm.

The identification of how knowledge is generated and shared among teams in each methodology, the optimum pairing of the methodology and the parallels with the other, and the differences that emerge from the adopted knowledge cycle show that software projects are embedded in a knowledge cycle.

The purpose of this paper is to present a review of literature that establishes the factors affecting the ability of an organisation to absorb and apply knowledge. The review aims to draw from literature on the resource‐based view of the firm, dynamic capabilities, organisational learning, knowledge management and technological innovation. The paper then seeks to present a model of knowledge translation capability synthesised from the literature review.

The model that is synthesised from the literature review draws on three streams of work. First, the work of Dorothy Leonard on technological capability; second, the I‐space model of knowledge assets developed by Max Boisot; and third, other work based in the organisational learning and innovation management literature. The model is illustrated using a case study of an innovation project.

The effective development of a knowledge translation capability requires attention to a network of both formal and informal structures/activities across an organisation. Together these activities constitute a dynamic capability that operates iteratively throughout the whole organisation and are an example of triple‐loop learning processes.

The paper will prove useful to other academics in the area of technological innovation and practising managers who can use the model to evaluate their own organisation's knowledge translation capability.

The advantage of the model presented is that, unlike other discussions of dynamic capability, the link between conceptual level description and real world activities has been made more distinct. By recognising relevant organisational structures and relationships, it becomes possible to takes steps to assess their performance and then manage their improvement.

The advancement of human knowledge is the result of evolution of human capabilities for absorbing, developing and processing human intelligence, and perhaps just as equally, on the human capability to develop symbols and artifacts for assisting in the creation, diffusion and sharing of knowledge. These artifacts not only have evolved in their sophistication and ability to help human knowledge enterprise, but also they have become embedded in the knowledge networks and the global knowledge enterprises. The universal knowledge architecture today can be best represented as a set of interconnected networks linking the neural networks of our brain with our organizational, institutional, professional and societal networks, and the networks of knowledge artifacts. Within this context the knowledge enterprise is viewed as a sustaining quest for sense making through the human to human process for scaffolding of knowledge where the knowledge artifacts play quintessential and inseparable roles. The effectiveness of our efforts in developing and implementing the knowledge artifacts or management tools depends to a large extent on our ability to refocus the design context of these tools as artifacts, from an information centric paradigm to one of knowledge within the context of a sense‐making paradigm.

This paper aims to develop and validate a framework about the enablers and constraints to the creation, sharing and use of knowledge, by analyzing how enablers and constraints in a particular information environment – advocacy networks – impact each of the phases of the knowledge process.

The setting chosen for this research is a group of leading international non‐governmental organizations (INGOs), and their NGO partners in a developing country, pursuing a policy advocacy strategy in the context of an international donors conference. The qualitative research follows an embedded case study design with two levels of data collection and analysis: intra‐organizational: an individual INGO; and inter‐organizational: the advocacy network to which this INGO belongs.

Most enablers and constraints are internal to organizations and focus on the phases of knowledge use. Constraints associated with organizations' cultures, individuals' information‐processing preferences, and politics are prominent. The validated framework can then explain how specific constraints influence particular phases of the creation, sharing and use of knowledge and the nature of these constraints in settings where particular organizational cultures dominate.

Researchers have studied the enabling conditions through which knowledge is created and shared. Some contributions have focused on the role of personal beliefs and formal procedures; higher codification of knowledge; social capital; or technology and measurement, among others. The literature has been mainly focused on identifying particular constraints, without paying much attention to how they are manifested in the distinct phases of the knowledge process. This paper aims to make a contribution in this area.