Search results

This paper aims to investigate how virtual communities of practice (V‐CoP) develop in large‐scale virtual projects.

A case study of a large‐scale ES implementation was conducted in Italy and in the USA.

It was found that management can encourage the formation of V‐CoP if, along with the creation of virtual project teams they promote informal interaction between the team members, encourage commitment, and put together “the right mix of people”.

Understanding how the technical and the functional communities communicated is meaningful to understand the extent to which different CoP can, virtually, overcome context‐specific barriers.

This paper aims to propose that knowing in practice can be used as a mechanism to enhance social exchange in collaborative new product development (NPD) with suppliers to reduce glitches. Practic00es of inter-organizational knowing should consider the levels of supplier involvement adopted.

This paper studies two opposite situations of supplier involvement in NPD projects, namely, white and black box configurations. This paper adopts a qualitative comparative analysis method to identify necessary and sufficient configurations of knowing in practice in 36 projects from 3 different companies.

Social exchange is important even when the NPD collaboration is based on contractual relationships as in white and grey box collaborations. There are different combinations of practices for inter-organizational knowing that can limit glitches in each supplier configuration. This paper proposes a theoretical model that explains these relationships and contributions to the reduction of glitches.

This paper combines social exchange theory with knowing in practice in the supplier involvement context. The theoretical model contributes to the understanding of knowing in practice in white and black box configurations.

Knowledge-intensive entrepreneurial firms succeed when they can better marshal their knowledge resources into productive advantages, necessitating entrepreneurial orientation (EO) and knowledge management (KM) processes of knowledge acquisition, application, conversion and protection. However, configurations of EO and KM processes are unaccounted for in extant theory, and the differences between the operating context of knowledge-intensive entrepreneurial firms are unclear. Therefore, this study investigates the configurational combination of EO and KM processes in two different contexts as native and immigrant entrepreneurial firms.

Drawing on the knowledge-based theory, the authors apply fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) and necessity analysis of QCA (NCA) to data from Malaysian native (N = 185) and immigrant (N = 146) service-oriented entrepreneurial firms.

The results demonstrate that immigrant entrepreneurial firms’ performance relies on knowledge processes of knowledge acquisition and application to ensure intelligent effectuation of EO; but for native entrepreneurial firms, the critical knowledge processes for performance success are knowledge conversion and protection. The NCA suggests that EO is critical for both firms; however, conjunctional causations differ based on KM processes.

This study enriches the emerging knowledge-based theory of the entrepreneurial-oriented firm by advancing the theory and conversation by revealing how EO, KM processes and context link in which the profile of the EO–performance relationship is configurationally dependent. The study advances the knowledge-based theory of entrepreneurially-oriented firms to account for entrepreneurship in context.

This paper aims to review research on the topic of knowledge risks to establish the current body of knowledge and, on this basis, to suggest some promising avenues for future research.

This study consists of a systematic review of 52 refereed articles on knowledge risks.

The findings contribute to a more holistic view of the topic and related aspects and, thus, complement the study of knowledge management. Additionally, a number of research questions are proposed, aimed at guiding and informing future research activities.

This study may not have enabled a complete coverage of all articles in the field of knowledge risks. Yet, based on the chosen research methodology, it seems reasonable to assume that the review process covered a large share of studies available.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, no systematic literature review on knowledge risks and related issues has previously been published in academic journals.

The standards movement, while new in the current NCLB iteration, has been a part of education for almost the last half century (Popham, 2001; Sirotnik, 2004). According to several researchers (e.g., DiPaola & Walther-Thomas, 2003; Fullan, 2001; Lashley & Boscardin, 2003; Marsh, 2000; Villa & Thousand, 2000), there have been significant changes in the roles that school leaders must fulfill to implement a standards-based educational accountability system. The requirements of NCLB will not be a “passing fad” and so will affect the manner in which special education administrators conduct their work (Hochschild, 2003). As it stands, districts and schools are viewed as an amalgam of complex relationships (Harry, Sturges, & Klinger, 2005) that come together as learning communities to meet accountability targets for all students. The requirements for building a learning community involve the skills of collaboration and empowerment of others. Apparently, developing productive partnerships will exceed the previously defined narrow interpretation of collaboration with families and other professionals (Crockett, 2002). Standards-based accountability practices which disaggregate data based on specific subgroups, one of which is students with disabilities, are a result of the concern that exclusion of students from testing distorts the efficacy of educational reform efforts (Heubert & Hauser, 1999; McDonnell, McLaughlin, & Morison, 1997; Schulte & Villwock, 2004). However, concerns have also been raised regarding the validity of conclusions drawn from large-scale accountability data (Schulte & Villwock, 2004; Ysseldyke & Bielinski, 2002). Hargreaves (2003) concluded that “the rightful pursuit of higher standards has generated into a counter productive obsession with soulless standardization” (p. 82).

Much of the research and dialogue around the voluntary sector is around the economics and identity of the sector. Its relationship with clients, suppliers and government has become more sophisticated and complex. The ability of voluntary sector leadership to be proactive in determining the nature of these relationships underpins much of the current debate on the future of the voluntary sector, both in the UK and internationally. There are useful lessons to be learnt from business techniques. Yet, the execution of business‐enhancing tools needs to be considered in the context relevant to the sector’s interests and to the primary aims of a sector. This paper is based on practitioner experience, previous unpublished research, initial doctoral research into management and learning in the sector and e‐mail interviews with key respondents working in the non‐profit sector in the UK and Russia.

This paper aims to explore knowledge management (KM) literature to understand the relationships among different KM practices and organizational performance (OP) in terms of the four balanced scorecard (BSC) outcomes, i.e. learning and growth, internal process, customer satisfaction and financial performance, as a measure of OP.

A systematic review of peer-reviewed journal articles has been carried out of theoretical and empirical articles to understand the linkages between KM practices and OP, accessed mainly through sources, such as ProQuest, EBSCO host, Google Scholar and other e-databases. Measures of OP have also been extracted from the literature and grouped under the four BSC outcomes to gauge the gravity of the effect. An integrated conceptual framework helps to explore the relationship between the said variables.

This study provides a conceptual model of the effect of various KM practices on different aspects of OP measured through BSC. It contributes to organizations by helping them understand the importance of integration of the KM efforts to obtain desirable results. It will, for the first time, put the entire organization in perspective and help managers draw a bigger picture to understand the overall effect of KM practices.

First, the KM practices shortlisted for this research are extensive but the list may not be exhaustive. Second, the model is not empirically proved. Findings of the study would help in creating a roadmap to enhance performance by a successful implementation of KM practices.

This paper contributes to KM literature by adding the fact that KM practices not only affect learning and growth perspective of an organization but also have far-reaching effects on OP in terms of customer service perspective, internal process perspective and financial perspective.

The knowledge generated by academics in the field of management is often criticized because of its reduced relevance for professionals. In the review of the literature, the authors distinguish between three streams of thought. The review of the literature and the understanding of the research streams that have been addressed by the academic–practitioner gap in management has allowed to clarify that what truly underlies each of these approaches is a different assumption or paradigm from which the management science focusses.

This paper reviews the main approaches that have analysed this topic, drawing a number of conclusions.

The knowledge generated by academics in the field of management is often criticized because of its reduced relevance for professionals. In the review of the literature, the authors distinguish between three main perspectives. The review of the literature and the understanding of the research streams that have been addressed by the academic–practitioner gap in management has allowed us to clarify that what truly underlies each of these approaches is a different assumption or paradigm from which the management science focusses. To represent the findings of the literature review in this sense, the authors will present, first, a model that serves as a framework to interpret the different solutions proposed in the literature to close the gap from a positivist paradigm. Subsequently, they question this view through a reflection that brings us closer to a more pragmatic and interpretive paradigm of management science to bridge the research–practice gap.

In recent studies, researchers agree that there is an important gap between management research and practice, which may bear little resemblance to each other. However, the literature on this topic does not seem to be guided by a rigorously structured discourse and, for the most part, is not based on empirical studies. Moreover, a sizeable body of literature has been developed with the objective of analysing and contributing solutions that reconcile management researchers and professionals. To offer a more systematic view of the literature on this topic, the paper classifies previous approaches into three different perspectives based on the ideas on which they are supported. Finally, the paper concludes with some reflections that could help to reorient the paradigm from which the management research is carried out.