Search results

This paper aims to present a classification of approaches toward knowledge claim evaluation (KCE), which is the process of evaluating and testing knowledge claims in organizations, and to position KCE as a fundamental research issue for KM.

The paper draws from a range of KM theories in the academic literature and reviews the role of KCE. Concepts and principles from epistemology provide the basis for the analysis and classification of KCE approaches. The paper's particular focus is on KCE in innovation. Furthermore, practical examples illustrate the working of KCE.

KCE is a neglected process in KM theories. The conceptual underpinnings of KCE in KM theories are insufficient and empirical studies are lacking. The paper identifies three approaches towards KCE from the literature. The proposed classification shows that KCE can be dealt with in various ways, and that an understanding concerning the practical workings, the contextual factors and effects of KCE can yield fruitful advances in KM theory and organizational practice.

The literature review is based on a pre‐defined choice of KM theories in KM literature, whereas alternative selection criteria may be possible.

KCE is a topic that is under‐exposed in the KM literature. The authors show that multiple approaches toward KCE can be identified and that KCE can be very relevant for organizations and KM theory and practice.

Knowledge management (KM) as a field has been characterized by great confusion about its conceptual foundations and scope, much to the detriment of assessments of its impact and track record. The purpose of this paper is to contribute toward defining the scope of KM and ending the confusion, by presenting a conceptual framework and set of criteria for evaluating whether claimed KM interventions are bona fide instances of it or are interventions of another sort.

Methods used include conceptual evaluation and critique of a variety of types of “KM interventions” and presentation of a detailed analysis of an unambiguous case (The Partners HealthCare case) where KM has been successful.

The critical analysis indicates that the use of tools and methods associated with KM does not imply that interventions using them are KM interventions, and most “KM projects” are probably interventions of other types. The analysis also illustrates a pattern of intervention that can serve as the basis of a long‐term systematic strategy for implementing KM.

This is the first detailed examination of whether KM is really being done by those who claim to be doing it. It should be of value to all those who think about the scope of organizational learning and KM, and who care about unbiased assessments of its performance.

The paper investigates knowledge sharing and co‐creation in an organisation‐wide discussion supported by Computer‐Mediated Communication (CMC). The paper draws on the empirical evidence from a field study of a consultative process as part of a University strategic decision‐making. Informed by Habermas’s theory of communicative action, the investigation focuses on communicative practices in the CMC discussion and the ways participants interact, share knowledge and co‐create meanings in a particular situation. Communicative analysis of organisational discourse via CMC reveals hidden structures and mechanisms that impede knowledge sharing and inhibit cooperative meaning making. The issue here is whether CMC enables or disables some of these structures and mechanisms. By interpreting the CMC discussion as an argumentation process the paper aims to provide deeper insights into this issue. Among the lessons learned are requirements for new technologies to support knowledge sharing and meaning co‐creation.

The critical dimension and the one that can unify knowledge through systemic interrelationships, is unification of the purely a priori with the purely a posteriori parts of total reality into a congruous whole. This is a circular cause and effect interrelationship between premises. The emerging kind of world view may also be substantively called the epistemic‐ontic circular causation and continuity model of unified reality. The essence of this order is to ground philosophy of science in both the natural and social sciences, in a perpetually interactive and integrative mould of deriving, evolving and enhancing or revising change. Knowledge is then defined as the output of every such interaction. Interaction arises first from purely epistemological roots to form ontological reality. This is the passage from the a priori to the a posteriori realms in the traditions of Kant and Heidegger. Conversely, the passage from the a posteriori to a priori reality is the approach to knowledge in the natural sciences proferred by Cartesian meditations, David Hume, A.N. Whitehead and Bertrand Russell, as examples. Yet the continuity and renewal of knowledge by interaction and integration of these two premises are not rooted in the philosophy of western science. Husserl tried for it through his critique of western civilization and philosophical methods in the Crisis of Western Civilization. The unified field theory of Relativity‐Quantum physics is being tried for. A theory of everything has been imagined. Yet after all is done, scientific research program remains in a limbo. Unification of knowledge appears to be methodologically impossible in occidental philosophy of science.

The purpose of this article is to analyze how learning occurs in inter-organizational online communities, despite highly diverse even conflicting knowledge claims among participants.

We compared two inter-organizational communities in the domain of development aid through inductive qualitative case study.

We found that diverse communities proved more likely to yield conflicting knowledge claims in terms of expertise, value consensus and formal position. However, they were also better positioned for enabling mutual learning, than communities with a more uniform representation.

We provide theoretical insights for knowledge management by showing how the negotiation of knowledge claims facilitates mutual learning in inter-organizational online communities.

The findings are practically relevant for managers of knowledge-intensive organizations by showing how knowledge is shared in diverse online communities. The research also shows that the recognized challenges which diverse communities can yield are likely to be outweighed by their benefits: enabling mutual learning, generating useful expertise and a stronger negotiating position.

The paper conceives of a development approach that is more inclusive of non-dominant perspectives and solutions in decision-making processes, contributing to improved participation of marginalized people in decision-making processes.

We add a new dimension to knowledge management literature, showing how conflict and learning can be a mutually reinforcing process. Contrary to prior knowledge-based views, we found that a diverse community, with a higher concentration of conflicting knowledge claims, facilitated mutual learning more adeptly than a more uniform community. This is important for knowledge management theory and practice because it shows how inter-organizational communities can benefit from heterogeneity, and how conflict can enable and even strengthen mutual learning.

This study aims to investigate whether nutrition knowledge impacts on the credibility and purchase behaviour of foodstuffs that make health claims.

The UCD Food and Health Survey is a monthly online survey, which began in November 2008. In March 2009, participants were asked a series of questions pertaining to nutrition and health claims and 665 completed questionnaires were included for analysis. Participants' level of nutrition knowledge was measured using a combined and modified version of Parmenter and Wardle's General Nutrition Knowledge Questionnaire (1999) and that of Hawkes and Nowak (1998). Perceived credibility was gauged using a semantic differential scale and the questionnaire was designed to also assess participants' purchasing behaviour of functional foods.

Females scored significantly higher than males for nutrition knowledge (p=0.004) but there was no significant difference in nutrition knowledge between age groups. “Reduces feelings of hunger” was deemed the most credible claim. With the exception of “This yogurt drink will strengthen your bones and teeth”, there was no difference in credibility between high and low nutrition knowledge groups. Health claims were more credible to participants when found on yogurt and breakfast cereal when compared with pasta and chocolate. Products claiming to reduce cholesterol were purchased more in the previous month than any of the other products and the same product was purchased statistically more often by those participants in the older age group.

A limitation of this study was that the panel were younger and more formally educated than the general public. They were also more likely to be female. The gender bias may be because the survey was food and health‐based and therefore may not have appealed to men as a more generally themed survey might have done. The results of this study should be considered therefore with this limitation in mind.

People do not consider products with health claims to be a uniform category of foodstuffs and participants' level of nutrition knowledge does not have a significant impact on their behaviour towards products carrying health claims.

Knowledge of nutrition does not impact on people's reactions to products with health claims and different foods demonstrate different levels of credibility as carriers for health claims.

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the results of futures studies are knowledge or if not, what it is that futures studies actually produce. Five types of representations of the future are the result of these studies. As the value of futures studies depends on no small measure of their credibility, the standards for carrying out and reporting these studies are identified along with a description of how Toulmin’s model of informal logic can be used to best improve their credibility.

This paper is based on a multi-disciplinary literature review and integrative analysis.

Using epistemological criteria for knowledge as truth, belief and rationale, the results of futures studies are not and cannot be knowledge. Instead, futures studies produce five kinds of “representations of the future”: predictions, projections and forecasts, scenarios, visions and structures for action. Six standards for conducting and reporting the results of futures studies are provided which will increase the credibility of these studies. Toulmin’s informal logic format will provide the foundation for the most persuasive basis of such studies.

Futurists will understand that the products of their studies are not knowledge and why this is the case. They will also understand that the type of futures studies they are conducting are either conditional, contingent propositions or normative prescriptions in nature. There are six guidelines for carrying out and reporting futures studies which can also be used to assess the quality of published studies. They will see how the use of a certain kind of informal logic can establish the most credible foundations for their studies.

As an integrative literature review, it incorporates and simplifies widely disparate existing contributions to the topic of the nature of knowledge regarding futures studies and the criteria for making such studies as credible as possible.

Decades of innovation in designing usable (and unusable) interfaces have resulted in a plethora of guidelines, usability methods, and other design tools. The purpose of this research is to develop ways for novice developers to effectively leverage and contribute to the large and growing body of usability knowledge and methods.

This work presents the first extensive usage evaluation of an integrated design environment and knowledge management system, LINK‐UP. Key to this effort is the central design record (CDR), a design representation meant to prevent breakdowns occurring between design and evaluation phases.

The case study results show that a design knowledge IDE centered on the CDR can help novices make connections between requirements data, design representations and evaluation data and better understand how to leverage that information to improve designs.

Future efforts are focusing on exploring the utility of this approach for practitioners—especially agile developers.

A useful process and toolset for teaching usability design to novice developers and students.

The CDR makes designs coherent and understandable, thus supporting a principled, guided development process critical for student developers.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how the purchase intention of functional food is influenced by the perception of carrier-ingredient fit, that is, to what extent the carrier product and functional ingredient are intuitively perceived to be matched, and how such influence is moderated by consumers’ prior nutrition knowledge and provided health claim.

Through two phases of experimental studies on 30 hypothetical functional foods, this paper analyzed the relationship between perceived carrier-ingredient fit and purchase intention which were reported by participants with different nutrition knowledge levels and in conditions that differed in the content of health claim.

Phase 1 (n=62) found that the positive influence of perceived fit on purchase intention of functional products was moderated by one’s prior nutrition knowledge; compared to those knowledgeable in food/nutrition fields, consumers with less knowledge relied more heavily on the perceived carrier-ingredient fit when making purchase decision. The results of study 2 Phase 2 (n=93) revealed that the perceived fit was more important to predict purchase intention in the condition without health claim. A further analysis revealed that health claim increased the purchase intention particularly for functional foods receiving poor perceived carrier-ingredient fit.

For innovative functional foods, the product development and market penetration may be benefit from fine-grained segmentation and positioning strategies that are based on the understanding of interaction between intuitive perception and cognitive knowledge.

The present work highlights consumers’ perception of the carrier-perception fit, interacting with nutrition knowledge and health claim, as a critical factor determining the acceptance of functional foods.

This paper aims to achieve fully intertwined knowledge and business processing in change processes. It proposes streamlining situated articulation work, value network analyses (VNA) and subject-oriented business process modelling (S-BPM) and execution to provide non-disruptive single and double learning processes driven by concerned stakeholders. When implementing knowledge life cycles, such as Firestone and McElroy’s knowledge life cycle, the agility of organizations is significantly constrained, in particular, when surviving knowledge claims should be implemented in the business processing environment in a seamless way.

The contribution is based on a conceptual analysis of knowledge life cycle implementations, learning loop developments and an exploratory case study in health care to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach. The solution towards non-disruptive knowledge and business processing allows stakeholders to actively participate in single- and double-loop learning processes.

The introduced approach supports problem and knowledge claim formulation, knowledge claim evaluation and non-disruptive knowledge integration into a business process environment. Based on stakeholder articulation, the steps to follow are: holomapping, exchange analysis, impact analysis, value creation analysis, subject-oriented modelling, business process validation and execution. Seamless support of stakeholders is enabled through the direct mapping of stakeholder and activity descriptions from value network representations to behaviour specifications (process models) on the individual and organizational layer.

Current knowledge life cycle developments and implementations can now be analyzed in a structured way. Elements of the proposed approach could be integrated in disruptive implementations to overcome current limitations of knowledge life cycles. However, further case studies need to be performed to identify hindrances or barriers of combining VNA and S-BPM, both on the technological and methodological layer. What works for expert service industries might need to be adapted for production industries, and tools or tool chains might need to be configured accordingly. Finally, the socio-economic impact of the approach needs to be explored.

The presented case study from health care reveals the potential of such a methodological combination, as cycle times can be reduced, in particular, due to the execution of role-specific process models in the respective business processing environment. It can be considered as a fundamental shift for existing change management procedures, as they require rework of the entire functional process models when addressing business processing. Now, stakeholder- or role-specific behaviour can be handled isolated and in parallel, without affecting the entire organization in case of modifications.

The proposed methodological integration has not been done before. It enables stakeholders to perform single- and double-loop change processes in a seamless way.