Search results

The paper sets out to suggest that knowledge in the SME enterprise is embodied as evident in such notions as tacit knowing and learning, and embedded grounded in the situated social historic contexts of individual lives and work. This supports the view that the nature of knowledge is inherently indeterminate and continually evolving.

A practice‐based approach focuses towards, the point of action, enabling the researcher to observe knowing as an intimate recursive feature of organisational life, the local in which traditional dualisms lose their meaning, in the specific context of real time practices, in that the knowing subject and the known objects cannot be treated in isolation and opposed to one another, the given and the emergent co‐exist and presuppose one another.

The paper offers the suggestion that a social process perspective offers a means of engaging the SME enterprise in more effective knowledge creating activities, and fostering innovation, which is both relevant and useful to them.

The paper offers the suggestion that a social process perspective offers a means of engaging the SME enterprise in more effective knowledge creating activities, and fostering innovation, which is both relevant and useful to them.

The paper seeks to extend the current conceptualisations of organisational learning developing the view that learning is no longer associated with the diffusions of pieces of knowledge, but rather it is viewed as the process of developing of situated identities based on participation in a process of social engagement and interaction.

Reflecting on 25 years of collaborating in action learning research initiatives in interorganizational settings, the authors have framed three key theoretical contributions: (1) a formula for action learning in networks, (2) the notion of action learning research, and (3) the application of action learning research in networks. This chapter reviews how each of these three key theoretical contributions emerged as insights and were developed over time through three large-scale funded interorganizational action learning projects. The chapter provides insights into the process of theorizing as the authors show how these frameworks emerged through inquiry into experience and were consolidated through collaborative action as practice-based research, research as practice, and practice as research toward designed-in impact.

This paper aims to attempt to provide an overview of the valuable scientific contribution on learning organization in social science from the perspectives of Professor Silvia Gherardi and discusses the evolution of Silvia’s work over her long career.

With the collaboration of this leading scholar, Professor Silvia Gherardi, this paper investigates several topics pertaining to the debate on Learning Organization and provides a unique perspective on the development of these theories.

Starting from the Italian perspective, in which knowledge and learning are mainly social and cultural phenomena, the paper focuses on Professor Silvia Gherardi’s contribution to the emerging area of practice-based theorizing of knowing and learning in organizations.

In the light of different epistemological approaches and views, the discussion with Professor Silvia Gherardi reveals her practice-based perspective. She proposes a historical analysis of the evolution of the Learning Organization debate, thus providing fertile ground for both researchers and practitioners.

The purpose of this paper is to illustrate the contribution offered by Wolff’s sociology of knowledge to organizational ethnography and to enrich the lexicon of practice-based studies with the concept of surrender-and-catch.

Drawing on Wolff’s writing, the surrender-and-catch perspective is introduced and how to be inspired by it is illustrated in relation to three working practices.

The centrality of the body and of sensible knowledge for doing ethnographies of working practices is affirmed and the surrender-and-catch perspective is interpreted as an art of seeing connections.

Surrender-to may be included in the methodology for studying knowing-in-practice and it may help students to get prepared to conduct an organizational ethnography.

A contribution to frame the legacy of a sociologist of knowledge little known in organization studies. Its contribution stresses the importance of a plurality of forms of knowing alongside the rational-analytic one. Therefore Kurt Wolff’s work becomes relevant within the practice-based studies.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce the special issue, positioning the articles in relation to the current “turn to practice” within organisation and management studies.

The paper introduces a schematic classification of ways of putting practice at the centre of the concern of social scientists depending on the interest of the researcher and his/her position with regard to the object of the research.

The paper finds that turning to practice does not necessarily, or simply, equate with becoming more engaged, or with making social science relevant, or with moving social science closer to the practical concerns of separate practitioners. It is argued that the effort should be concentrated on developing a type of theory that helps practitioners articulate what they already do, and therefore somehow know. The model for this way of theorising would therefore be not physics or astronomy but rather grammar – a discipline that although just as old, has been based traditionally on a very different relationship between knower and known.

The paper argues that when conceived after a grammatical model, “theory” may become a resource to be used in action and for action to produce emancipatory awareness and trigger change through critical reflection.

The papers in this special issue constitute an initial contribution in this direction as they indicate different ways in which theory, when developed “with” and “amid” and not “for” or even “about” practitioners, may become a powerful trigger of change and transformation.

This paper aims to review existing literature on the role of human resource management (HRM) practices in nurturing employee’s organisational commitment (OC), which subsequently promoting knowledge transfer (KT) within an organisation and propose a conceptual framework for future empirical research.

An extensive review of existing literature was undertaken in an attempt to build the conceptual model for KT.

The proposed conceptual framework illustrates the role of OC as a focal mediating mechanism in fostering KT. This paper identifies “high commitment” HRM (HCHRM) (e.g. staffing, job design, training and development, performance appraisal and reward system) as the factors influencing the development of OC, which subsequently affecting KT (i.e. knowledge sharing and application). Also, this paper integrates the potential moderating roles of leader-member exchange (LMX) between HCHRM practices-OC, as well as information and communication technology support in the OC-KT linkage into the proposed framework.

This paper presents a comprehensive view of fostering KT. However, the major limitation of this paper is that it remains at a conceptual level. Further empirical investigations would be helpful to test propositions, hence validating the proposed conceptual framework.

The proposed conceptual framework could serve as practical guidance for managers and/or practitioners in developing policies that will facilitate KT in business organisations.

While KT is often viewed as a single phenomenon, this paper considers the KT into two components (i.e, sharing and application) in accordance with the practice-based perspective on knowledge and behavioural approach to KT. In addition, the adoption of the general workplace commitment model in conceptualising KT could further validate its applicability in knowledge management research. Also, the integration of LMX as a moderator in the proposed framework could contribute to the scant research on LMX-related moderation models upon validation.

This conceptual paper aims to argue that times, spaces, bodies and things constitute four essential dimensions of workplace learning. It examines how practices relate or hang together, taking Gherardi’s texture of practices or connectedness in action as the foundation for making visible essential but often overlooked dimensions of workplace learning.

This framework is located within and adds to contemporary sociomaterial- or practice-based approaches, in which learning is understood as an emergent requirement and product of ongoing practice that cannot be specified in advance.

The four dimensions are essential in two senses: they are the constitutive essence of textures of practices: what they are made of and they are non-optional; it is not possible to conceive a texture of practices without all of these dimensions present. Although the conceptual terrains to which they point overlap considerably, they remain useful as analytic points of departure. Each reveals something that is less clear in the others.

This innovative framework responds to calls to better understand how practices hang together, and offers a toolkit that reflects the multifaceted nature of practice. It presents a distinctive basis for making sense of connectedness in action, and thus for understanding learning in work.

The paper offers a novel conceptual framework, expanding the texture of practices through dimensions of times, spaces, bodies and things, rendering visible aspects that might otherwise be ignored.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce a special issue on boundary organising in healthcare bringing together a selection of six leading papers accepted for presentation at the 12th Organisational Behaviour in Health Care (OBHC 2020) Conference.

In this introductory paper, the guest editors position the special issue papers in relation to the theoretical literature on boundaries and boundary organising and highlight how these contributions advance our understanding of boundary phenomena in healthcare.

Three strands of thinking – practice-based, systems theory and place-based approaches – are briefly described, followed by an analytical summary of the six papers included in the special issue. The papers illustrate how the dynamic processes of boundary organising, stemming from the dual nature of boundaries and boundary objects, can be constrained and enabled by the complexity of broader multi-layered boundary landscapes, in which local clinical and managerial practices are embedded.

The authors set the scene for the papers included in the special issue, summarise their contributions and implications, and suggest directions for future research.

The authors call for interdisciplinary and multi-theoretical investigations of boundary phenomena in health organisation and management, with a particular attention to (1) the interplay between multiple types of boundaries, actors and objects operating in complex multi-layered boundary systems; (2) diversity of the backgrounds, experiences and preferences of patients and services users and (3) the role of artificial intelligence and other non-human actors in boundary organising.

Developing strategies of reflection, mitigation, justification and relational work is crucial for the success of boundary organising initiatives.

The purpose of this paper is to add a new term to the vocabulary of practice-based studies: “formativeness”, which denotes the kind of knowledge that is generated in the process of realizing the object of the practice and that is discovered while the form of the object is being shaped. This term focuses the analysis on how the elements of a practice are held together, rather than on what elements are involved in a practice.

Inspired by grounded theory, an empirical research study on craftswomen and their practical creativity (between the hand and the head) was designed. Storytelling was used in order to elicit the verbalization of the craftswomen's ways of knowing/doing, and the episodic interview was the technique employed to access and present the data.

Formativeness can be described and interpreted as the effect of the following dimensions: the emergence of the object, the golden rule of realization, forming by hybridization, experimentation, playfulness, attachment to matter, and proper realization.

The study's contribution may be evaluated in relation to how a vocabulary for describing and interpreting knowing-in-practice is constructed. Formativeness makes it possible to name the process by which ways of doing are discovered while activities are being performed. It contributes to a critique of representational knowledge, while offering an alternative line of inquiry.

This paper aims to provide an account of learning and change in the redesign of a primary health-care initiative in a large metropolitan city in Australia.

The paper is based on research exploring the place and role of learning in the re-making of health professional practices in a major New South Wales Government health reform called HealthOne. The analysis and findings presented here make reference to data drawn from a longitudinal ethnographic study (2011-2014) conducted by an inter-disciplinary team of researchers from the University of Technology Sydney. Socio-material and practice-based approaches for understanding learning are used in working with the data.

There were substantial changes in professional practice, especially in the role of the General Practice Liaison Nurse. Changes, and the learning connected to the changes, were dynamically influenced by the macro-context. HealthOne was a reform initiative with a strong focus on achieving health service redesign and a consistent focus on staff developing new ways of thinking and operating. Although learning was often discussed, it was, for the most part, expressed in general terms, and there was a lack of a formal and well-developed approach to learning collectively and individually.

This research paper will inform future attempts at service redesign in community and primary health contexts and provides a site-specific examination of workplace learning in a context of rapid change.