Search results

Technology provision and Next Generation Learning Spaces (NGLS) should respond to the active learning needs of twenty-first century learners and privilege multiple ‘pictures of learning’ and associated knowledge work. In this sense it is important for NGLS to be pedagogically agnostic – agile enough to cater for a range of pedagogical approaches within the one physical space. In this chapter, the democratising and potentially disruptive power of new digital technologies to facilitate the privileging of these multiple pictures of learning is explored, recognising the significant rise in student ownership and academic use of mobile technologies. With their escalating ubiquity and their facilitation of active knowledge work, research around considerations for the implementation of mobile digital technologies is canvassed, highlighting a range of issues to be considered. This is part of the ‘hidden work’ of technology implementation. Without this hidden work, the potential of NGLS in facilitating and privileging active learning and multiple pictures of learning is diminished and the potential for reinforcing already powerful and potentially exclusionary modes of knowledge work increases. Finally to assist in articulating the hidden work of digitally enabled NGLS, a model is proposed to help understand how ease of use and confidence impacts on student and academic knowledge work.

Work teams have gained increasing importance as businesses shift to knowledge-based organizational structures. At the same time, advances in information technology have facilitated this change by enabling virtual work environments. To add to this complexity, the increasing demographic diversity of workers is coinciding with the rise in virtual and knowledge-based work environments. Therefore, it is critical that we understand the impact of these changes as they coincide in organizations today.

One of the extolled virtues of work teams is their potential to combine the unique knowledge held by individual workers, integrating these knowledge resources to bear on productive tasks. To effectively utilize their distributed knowledge, work teams have to perform three basic knowledge-processing activities: (a) knowledge acquisition; (b) knowledge integration; and (c) knowledge creation. However, work teams often have difficulty processing their distributed knowledge. The ability of team members, or lack thereof, to work effectively with each other is usually the problem.

The increasing demographic diversity of workers presents similar challenges for organizations. Demographically diverse workers have more unique knowledge, leading to increased knowledge differentiation in work teams. A work team that has high knowledge differentiation is one whose members possess different expertise. The unique knowledge held by individual team members effectively enlarges a work team's pool of knowledge resources. However, the increasing demographic diversity of workers often results in work teams having more difficulty processing their distributed knowledge because team members are not able to work effectively with different others. That being the case, the potential for demographically diverse work teams to more effectively perform productive tasks is lost.

We realize that demographically diverse work teams are a special (and important) case of teams in that they are both high on differentiated knowledge and high on the potential for conflict and other process losses. However, with an increasingly global marketplace, this special case is quickly becoming commonplace. Therefore, it is critical that we find ways to help demographically diverse work teams limit their process losses and realize their full potential.

Virtual work environments only heighten the need for demographically diverse work teams to minimize their process losses. Team members are often separated by both geographic space and time, which makes it even more challenging for them to work effectively with each other. In such environments, team members are often isolated from one another and find it difficult to feel a part of their team. Interestingly, computer-mediated communication has been shown to enhance team performance by helping team members communicate more effectively with each other. In fact, empirical work by Bhappu, Griffith, and Northcraft (1997) suggests that computer-mediated communication can actually help demographically diverse work teams process their distributed knowledge more effectively.

In this chapter, we will discuss the effects of demographic diversity and virtual work environments on knowledge processing in teams. More specifically, we will describe when computer-mediated communication is likely to enhance knowledge processing in demographically diverse work teams and when it is not. In doing so, we hope to provide both workers and managers with a set of guidelines on how to best navigate these organizational changes.

This study aims to explore the effects of remote work on employee productivity and innovation and how these effects are moderated by knowledge sharing and digital business intensity.

The study draws on survey data from a random sample of 231 remote workers across the USA. The analysis and empirical validation of the research model used partial least square.

The results demonstrate a positive association between remote work and employee productivity. In addition, the findings present empirical support for hitherto anecdotal evidence regarding the impact of remote work on innovation. In particular, the study notes that knowledge sharing and digital business intensity amplified the positive relationship between remote work and employee productivity. The results further revealed that the positive link between remote work and innovation was stronger in the presence of knowledge sharing.

The study contributes to the ongoing inquiry into remote work by drawing on the knowledge-based view as an underlying lens to understand the consequence of remote work. Identifying knowledge sharing and digital business intensity as moderators of the linkage between remote work and employee productivity is an important contribution, especially when researchers and practitioners are trying to understand the business value of working remotely. Furthermore, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to identify knowledge sharing as a key mechanism that strengthens innovation outcomes in a remote work environment.

The purpose of this paper is to map and describe the activities taking place in the academic workplace. It considers whether academic work is something completely different from traditional knowledge work and identifies differences and similarities between the two.

The data was collected through in-depth interviews with thirteen academics from different disciplines at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology within a case study approach. A document analysis of the university’s disciplines was carried out in advance of the interviews.

Four important similarities between knowledge work and academic work and three distinctive features of academic work were identified. Balancing the need for interaction and concentration is most important for both knowledge work and academic work, and the most prominent differences are the academics’ constant alternation between supervision, teaching, concentration work and administrative tasks, as well as some academics’ close links to practice. Academic work is not completely different from knowledge work, and learning from experiences from other sectors can be valuable when designing workplaces for academic staff. It is necessary to understand the activities taking place in the academic workplace and at the same time plan for future flexibility.

This study contributes to the research on workplace design for academic staff to better understand the characteristics and variations of academic work and differences in academic cultures and traditions. This will contribute to a better understanding of how workplace design, work processes, technology and how the institution is organised can support the university’s visions and goals.

This study aims to identify knowledge-related tensions in remote work in higher education institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic and increase understanding of how such tensions can be managed.

The research was conducted as an inductive, qualitative study in the field of higher education in Finland. The data were collected using semi-structured interviews of 34 managers in two higher education institutions and analyzed using an inductive and interpretive analysis method.

The findings demonstrate that the knowledge-related challenges and opportunities during the remote work period of the COVID-19 pandemic in Finnish higher education institutions can be conceptualized as tensions involved in knowledge codification, knowledge silos and creating new knowledge. The study contributes to research by presenting a framework for managing knowledge-related tensions in remote work arrangements to benefit remote and hybrid work in knowledge-intensive organizations.

This paper increases the understanding of the tensions in remote work arrangements; the results can help managers understand the challenges and opportunities of remote knowledge work concerning their organization and thereby assist them in management and decision-making in complex operational environments.

This study adopted the little-used perspective of tensions to examine knowledge management issues. By examining the various affordances that remote work may allow for knowledge-intensive work and higher education institutions, the study contributes to a deepened understanding of knowledge work in remote contexts, the related tensions and their management.

Knowledge sharing is increasingly important in today’s information age and extant literature considers knowledge hoarding as an undesirable form of knowledge-withholding behavior. As knowledge hoarding is a generic, nonintentional behavior, specific attitudes and organizational processes are unlikely to curb it. Hence, the study postulates that reflection, awareness and group identification are necessary to combat innate tendencies toward knowledge hoarding. To test these hypotheses, this study aims to explore the role of mindfulness and relational systems in reducing employees’ knowledge hoarding by increasing their meaning-making through work.

The study results are based on a cross-sectional survey of 203 employees in India working for different organizations. Standardized scales were used for capturing data, and partial least squares structural equation modeling was used for analysis.

Mindfulness and team cohesion were positively related to an increase in meaning-making through work. Supervisor support improved perceptions of team cohesion. However, contrary to expectations, team cohesion and meaning-making through work were positively, rather than negatively, related to knowledge hoarding.

The cross-sectional nature of the study prevents strong inference of causal relationships. Future studies may use a longitudinal design to test the relationships.

It highlights the role of meditation sessions and supervisory support in improving employees’ perceptions of meaning-making through work. It exhorts managers to systematically assess the impact and societal perceptions regarding knowledge hoarding rather than automatically assume a negative attitude.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to investigate the impact of mindfulness, team cohesiveness and meaning-making through work on employees’ knowledge hoarding behaviors. The study results suggest that knowledge hoarding may be perceived positively in certain cultures. It highlights the inconsistencies in the conceptualization and operationalization of knowledge hoarding and suggests the need for better construct delineation and empirical studies related to knowledge hoarding.

Extant literature tends to consider knowledge boundaries as a necessary property of interdisciplinary work. Knowledge boundaries are, thus, reified and treated as something to be traversed, transcended or otherwise negotiated. There is, however, very little work that closely examines the process of emergence of boundaries. The purpose of this paper is to critically consider the emergence, stabilization and dissolution of knowledge boundaries among experts during the design stage of a building project to understand whether knowledge boundaries are as delineated and predictable as the literature makes them out to be.

A process-based, ethnographic study of a construction project is used. Building on a large data set collected over 13 months of research, this paper closely examines collaborative work around one specific issue during design development work that tripped up collaboration of the multidisciplinary and inter-organizational design team.

Knowledge boundaries do not exist based on differences of substance among groups (e.g. being an engineer vs being an architect) but rather that they are a function of divergent constellations of interests, work tools and practical concerns. While holding binding powers, they evolve in the face of alignments and misalignments, agreements and conflicts. As interests shift, concerns unfold and tools are dropped or used; boundaries emerge or dissolve.

A processual view of knowledge boundaries is advanced by demonstrating how they evolve in face of convergent (or divergent) work tools, practical concerns and interests. Existing research tends to equate knowledge boundaries with occupational/professional differences directly, but this paper demonstrates that work across expertise domains does not generate boundaries by itself. Resulting theoretical contributions are twofold: first, the current understanding of knowledge boundaries is refined by explaining how and why they emerge and dissolve across and within specialist knowledge domains, and second, the role of power and politics in this process is empirically foregrounded, highlighting how constellations of interests can lead to dynamic alliances or divisions.

Social work space is emerging as a major avenue for sharing knowledge and the creation of social capital. Social space and physical space needs to be in balance. Virtual space must also be included in this mix. The physical work environment can support the new sense of place and space in the knowledge work. This paper discusses how to use tangible assets to make intangible social space perform better. In this paper the problem is approached by analysing the balance between physical, social and virtual space. The method used is based on “type” analysis, which uses the structure of a four‐quadrant model based on twin axis for the knowledge production circle. The focus is on the space needed in different phases of creating knowledge. The results of the pilot test show that work environments tend to support explicit knowledge sharing but fail to support tacit knowledge exchange.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the suitability of job and work design theory for investigating knowledge workers’ productivity. The review is a response to recommendation and adoption of the motivational human resource management approach by a number of knowledge management researchers. The authors show that the existing literature on this topic overlooks key criticisms of HRM job and work design theory itself. The authors suggest modifications.

The paper proceeds by outlining knowledge management researchers’ arguments rejecting the application of traditional measurement approaches to investigating knowledge workers’ productivity. The review develops to examine the various arguments for adopting work design theory and considers the key contributions and critiques in this field. Drawing on the insights of key HRM work design critics, the paper concludes by offering suggestions for a model suitable for examining the drivers of knowledge work productivity in process.

The principle finding is that Morgeson and Humphrey’s (2006) Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ) stand as the most conceptually consistent and methodologically considered human resource management work design theory. However, this model must itself be modified to include a category of organizational contextual work characteristics. For application to the filed of knowledge management, WDQ must also be expanded to include knowledge sharing, role breadth self-efficacy and employee well-being as key work design mediators and outcomes.

Greater consideration needs to be given to the distinction between knowledge sharing as a work design mediator and as a work design outcome. Morgeson and Humphrey themselves note that the “common method variance” problems arising in psychometric research have been reduced but not completely eliminated from their model.

Survey instruments based on the recommended model potentially provide a valuable means for understanding and enhancing productivity in a variety of knowledge intensive service industries. The pronounced benefit of this model is that it is applicable in cross-industry and cross-occupational contexts, unlike many existing knowledge worker productivity models. This is an advantage, given the centrality of the inter-connectivity of different types of activities and industries in knowledge work.

Work design prioritizes employee motivation and support and links this to the quality of work and the well-being of clients. The benefits of well-designed knowledge work extend well beyond the generation of specific innovations and macroeconomic productivity improvements.

Job design and work design theory have been applied in the field of knowledge management. However, the applications have largely overlooked key critiques of the established models in the human resource management literature. The paper fills this gap. Its original suggestions for modifying Moregeson and Humphry’s (2006) WDQ reflect the authors’ in-depth analysis of the literature.