Search results

Regarding the information society’s outcome, the only certainty is that there has been a revolution in the management of bit‐split knowledge and information. A flood of information has not significantly changed society in a direction or towards a state where a community could be characterized as a society of nearness, experience or citizenship, for example. Information and knowledge are probably the very concepts that have been confused most in the information society debate. Knowledge is to be understood as a phenomenon that is larger than information but uses information as its building material. Wisdom is additionally considered to include and cover the questions for which there are no unambiguous answers. It is wisdom that people use to estimate and distinguish good from evil and right from wrong. This is a task that calls for wisdom which computers do not have. Potential growth of wisdom in the information society is an issue that is difficult or impossible to say anything about with certainty. The reality of an information society includes the fact that wisdom is connected to moral and ethical judgements, and that the solutions are not always stronger than the powerseeking choices or egoistic interests of individuals, businesses, communities or states. Even if wisdom should promote the common good, it seems to be used, to an equal degree, to exclusively promote the good of the wise individual. But is it still wisdom we are talking about?

The purpose of this paper is to report the results of using the framework in the field for the purpose of formulating knowledge policies. The framework derives from a conceptual model for analyzing knowledge development overviewed by the authors in a previous paper.

The paper uses the conceptual framework of 13 dimensions for knowledge policy‐making analysis and qualitative focus group discussions by means of what is known as a knowledge SWOT analysis. Such an exercise ordinarily determines what is termed as net strength (strengths offset by weaknesses) and net opportunity (opportunities offset by threats).

The field research suggests that, whereas quantitative indicators are very commonly used for the purpose of benchmarking and progress tracking, they are limited in terms of determining causes, effects and encapsulating good practices. The present framework provides a means for policy‐makers and analysts to engage in discussion, debates, story‐telling and scenario building in order to understand net strengths and opportunities.

The research is limited by the time constraints of the focus group participants and it is not feasible to conduct a K‐SWOT of more than the four societies used for the reason that there are insufficient numbers of informed participants.

Developing the knowledge economy has to be more than a management of socio‐economic indicators. Understanding the net strength and opportunity faced by a society in the context of a global knowledge economy allowed insights into gaps that may be addressed with appropriate knowledge policies. There is much work to be done in formulating implementable policy recommendations.

It is hoped that a useful and valid policy analysis tool for knowledge development has thus been described.

The purpose of this paper is to address the place of computer/ICT ethics in the global ICT society driven by knowledge economy.

The paper focuses on three main issues: the evolution of the name of the leading technology of our times and, accordingly, the evolution of the name of the society in which this technology plays the leading role; some ethical dilemmas that the global ICT society will need to solve; global ICT ethics and the knowledge economy.

The paper suggests that global ICT ethics should be an ethics focusing on the dynamics of the relationship between the weak and the strong, the rich and the poor, the healthy and the sick worldwide – and it should explore the ethical problems from the point of view of both parties involved. That way, Global ICT Ethics can have a truly communicative character, and it can become an ethics that will be both a co‐creator and also a result of a democratic processes.

This paper should interest anyone concerned with ICT and globalization.

To provide some theoretical considerations concerning information literacy so as to contribute to a theoretically informed point of departure for understanding information literacy and to argue that to be an information literate person is to have knowledge about information sources and that searching and using them is determined by an insight into how knowledge is socially organized in society.

Using concepts from composition studies that deal with the question of what a writer needs to know in order to produce a text, the paper outlines some ideas and key concepts in order to show how these ideas and concepts are useful to our understanding of information literacy. To demonstrate how information‐literacy is to have knowledge about information sources and that searching and using them is determined by an insight into how knowledge is socially organized in society, the paper takes a point of departure in Habermas' theory of the public sphere.

Concludes that information seeking competence is a sociopolitical skill, like reading and writing skills, connected to human activity. Searching for documents in information systems is a complex and sociopolitical activity. As an expression of human activity we might say that searching for documents and reading and writing constitutes each other. The genre knowledge necessary in reading and writing does also apply when seeking information in systems of organized knowledge as the forms of information determine what can be expected and found in these systems. Information literacy covers, then, the ability to read society and its textually and genre‐mediated structures. Information literacy represents an understanding of society and its textual mediation.

Locating an understanding of information literacy in a broader discursive framework requires us to rethink our hitherto concepts and understandings of information literacy as socio‐political skills and not mere technical search skills

Rarely is information literacy discussed and understood from social‐theoretical perspectives. This article illuminates how an analysis of information literacy from the perspective of the theory of the public sphere can open up for an understanding of information literacy socio‐political skills. Thus, the article has contributed with a new interpretation of information literacy.

The research reported in this ongoing study aims to investigate the notion of knowledge assets developed within digital communities in the course of their economic or leisure activities. Ideally, the resulting knowledge is universal, affordable and relevant; this inclusiveness is a hallmark of any information or knowledge society.

The authors first synthesize the related research literature covering the areas of knowledge‐based economies, knowledge societies and knowledge policies. A model using 13 dimensions is then developed, which the authors claim is critical for creating a knowledge community in the digital economy. The model is validated against critique from a Delphi panel of researchers in the area.

While creating a knowledge society encompasses dimensions pertaining to infrastructure, governance, talent and culture, intangible assets are key to sustaining such societies. Governance and culture are instances of such intangibles. Talent may seem to be tangible but the human capacity for learning and development, which leads to an innovative culture, is less so. In any case, time is the essential ingredient for a knowledge culture to come about.

Knowledge societies are not measurable constructs that can be described quantitatively and benchmarked with weighted summations of scores along prescribed dimensions. It would be a fallacy to treat the notion of a knowledge index as a socio‐economic measure of success.

. conclude with a practical view of how the dimensions may be best exploited in the course of a policy discussion on sustainable knowledge societies.

It is hoped that the research will provide a framework for policy makers and analysts to conduct qualitative discussions on creating and sustaining knowledge societies.

Industry 4.0 defines the application of digital technologies on business infrastructure and processes. With the increasing need to take into account the social and environmental impact of technologies, the concept of Society 5.0 has been proposed to restore the centrality of humans in the proper utilization of technology for the exploitation of innovation opportunities. Despite the identification of humans, resilience and sustainability as the key dimensions of Society 5.0, the definition of the key factors that can enable Innovation in the light of 5.0 principles has not been yet assessed.

An SLR, followed by a content analysis of results and a clustering of the main topics, is performed to (1) identify the key domains and dimensions of the Industry 5.0 paradigm; (2) understand their impact on Innovation 5.0; (3) discuss and reflect on the resulting implications for research, managerial practices and the policy-making process.

The findings allow the elaboration of a multileveled framework to redefine Innovation through the 5.0 paradigm by advancing the need to integrate ICT and technology (Industry 5.0) with the human-centric, social and knowledge-based dimensions (Society 5.0).

The study detects guidelines for managers, entrepreneurs and policy-makers in the adoption of effective strategies to promote human resources and knowledge management for the attainment of multiple innovation outcomes (from technological to data-driven and societal innovation).

The purpose of this paper is to present the modeling of industrial–postindustrial transition in Russian society. The very special part of this process concerns the relations between lordship and bondage. The relations between Lordship and Bondage in a context of so-called Master–Slave dialectic can elucidate a way to the knowledge-based society as a kind of modern capitalistic society.

An author uses a complex of methods. He applies a phenomenological approach, mixed with the dialectics and analytical approach. Phenomenological approach presupposes the neediness of attention on a work of the conscious actions within formation of the social experiences. The modification of dialectics helps to make the comprehension of the history of social relations as a game of forces in self-consciousness, which nowadays bases on the attitudes between leaders and led people. A variant of analytic methodology helps to understand each problem as a puzzle.

As a result, author finds a spirit of the processes within development of knowledge-based society and innovative economy depends on so-called Master–Slave dialectic. In Europe, Master–Slave dialectic caused the leading role of scientists. In Russia, scientists depended on the Government and played secondary role in economy.

Research is the philosophical treatise, which demonstrates the speculative evaluation of industrial–postindustrial transition in Russian society.

Practical implications is the constructing the prognosis of the development of the Russian society.

Research can help to improve the understanding of the mechanisms of leadership in society.

Originality of the paper is the reconstruction of social forms, which caused the social progress in Russia.

The main purpose of this paper is to consider knowledge production as a social self‐organization process, to clarify ethical implications of such an approach, and to relate it to the thinking of Heinz von Foerster.

The method employed is the one of dialectical constructions, i.e. existing contradicting approaches on knowledge research are identified and classified and a constructive synthesis of these approaches is made.

Since Heinz von Foerster's pioneering work, information‐generating systems are considered to be self‐organizing systems. We see knowledge as only a particular kind of information: it is the manifestation of information in the social realm. Thus, the creation of social information is due to the self‐organization of social systems. Heinz von Foerster has given us some indications of how knowledge and self‐organization could be applied to society. In this paper, we try to sketch a position of our own while taking into consideration Heinz von Foerster's relevant ideas.

The research results in this paper imply that a knowledge‐based society can only survive if it is designed in a participatory and socially and ecologically sustainable way. Hence a practical implication is that participation and co‐operation need to be advanced in order to guarantee human development.

The innovative aspect of the paper is that it suggests that all social self‐organizing systems are knowledge‐producing systems and that considering knowledge as a co‐operative process implies responsibility for solving the global social problems. It combines knowledge research and systems thinking based on ideas on self‐organization by Heinz von Foerster in order to describe social systems.

To provide students, professors, political leaders, members of non‐governmental sector and economists with a review of Drucker's major works on recent changes in politics, government, society and economy.

This article briefly illustrates and discusses Drucker's thoughts and analysis presented mainly in the books Post‐Capitalist Society, New Realities and Managing in a Time of Great Change. However, reference is also made to other books and articles written by Drucker, as well as papers and books produced by other authors on his works or on subjects discussed in his works.

This article provides Drucker's views on recent changes in politics, government, society and economy, which have brought about new realities and challenges and have fundamentally transformed politics, economy and the society. Thorough considerations of these challenges would not provide fixed solutions but rather support and would enable governments, organizations and society at large to anticipate these transformations. It is believed that Drucker has made sound analyses of which one ought to take notice.

This article provides a useful source of information on political and economic changes in this turbulent world and recommendations on how to anticipate these changes.

It is believed that this paper contains an original review of Drucker's politically oriented writings. The findings and recommendations in this article can be useful for scholars, students, politicians, economists, leaders of civil society organizations and businesses to better understand the transformations taking place in society and hence enable leaders to make better decisions.

The purpose of this paper is to present a brief history of the information society and a research framework addressing the challenges of ensuring that information and communication technologies (ICTs) are applied in ways that are enabling and responsive to the varied contexts in which people live their lives.

Examination of why insights arising from research that is critical of the mainstream vision of the information society are rarely influential in debates on ICT policies, of the outstanding research questions around the promotion of investment in ICTs in support of sustainable development goals, and of the components of an alternative research framework that could be pursued by those concerned with social and technological innovation.

The analysis of policy discussion in this area indicates that there may now be an opportunity to re‐enter some of these debates, particularly those in which it is clear that there are many important issues that are reappearing on the ICT policy agenda. Some of the most difficult issues are highlighted including the need to give greater attention to measures supporting more differentiated information or knowledge societies.

The paper demonstrates that there are signs of learning and an awareness of unequal power relationships among stakeholders in ICT policy debates that may contribute to a shift in priorities towards a more context sensitive research framework that would be of value to those who are preoccupied by efforts to improve the material conditions of people's lives.