Search results

To investigate the nature of investment expertise and factors affecting the information processing and performance of investment experts, this paper hypothesizes normative characteristics of investment expertise and compares such characteristics with actual characteristics documented in prior literature on the investment expert. Based on collective evidence from these sources, a model of investment expertise is proposed.

Results support the existence of investment expertise in (1) the nature of knowledge, (2) problem solving and information search, and (3) performance. A variety of factors that could influence the information processing and performance of the investment expert, including personal, cognitive, and contextual elements, are also discussed in the paper and included in the proposed model of investment expertise.

Groups typically are composed of members with different knowledge, information, and expertise. Group discussion provides the means by which members can communicate their unique knowledge to reach better group decisions, develop a shared system for remembering and retrieving knowledge, and establish their expertise through enacted performance. In this chapter, three streams of research are reviewed that explore knowledge communication in groups: Hidden profiles, transactive memory systems, and a performative view of expertise. Each of these three research streams complements and informs the other. Across these three research streams, 10 major research findings are identified. We offer three research directions that include integrating these research streams, examining knowledge communication in the context of emerging technology (e.g., artificial intelligence), and studying effects of knowledge diversity in conjunction with surface-level diversity (e.g., member race).

Financial analysts' forecasts serve as a proxy for market earnings expectations, and research provides mixed evidence of the relation between financial analysts' expertise and forecast accuracy. The judgment and decision-making (J/DM) literature suggests that those with more expertise will not perform better when tasks exhibit either extremely high or extremely low complexity. Expertise is expected to contribute to superior performance for tasks between these two extremes. Using archival data, this research examines the effect of analysts' expertise on forecasting performance by taking into consideration the forecasting task's complexity. Results indicate that expertise is not an explanatory factor for forecast accuracy when the forecasting task's complexity is extremely high or low. However, when task complexity falls between these two extremes, expertise is a significant explanatory variable of forecast accuracy. Both results are consistent with our expectations.

This chapter explores expert witnessing in anthropology and the raison d’être of cultural expertise as an integrated socio-legal concept that accounts for the contribution of social sciences to the resolution of disputes and the protection of human rights. The first section of this chapter provides a short historical outline of the occurrence and reception of anthropological expertise as expert witnessing. The second section surveys the theoretical reflections on anthropologists’ engagement with law. The third section explores the potential for anthropological expertise as a broader socio-legal notion in the common law and civil law legal systems. The chapter concludes with the opportunity and raison d’être of cultural expertise grounded on a skeptical approach to culture. It suggests that expert witnessing has been viewed mainly from a technical perspective of applied social sciences, which was necessary to set the legal framework of cultural experts’ engagement with law, but had the consequence of entrenching the impossibility of a comprehensive study of anthropological expert witnessing. While this chapter adopts a skeptical approach to culture, it also argues the advantages of an interdisciplinary approach that leads to an integrated definition of cultural expertise.

This chapter advances understanding of how professional expertise is enacted and created to accomplish routines in the context of technology-mediated work. Information and communication technologies broaden the participation of professionals with various specialist skills and expertise to accomplish work together, which is particularly salient in health care. Broadening participation, however, creates jurisdictional conflict among professionals. Thus, a key challenge of interprofessional work is the need to mutually adapt established professional routines and overcome jurisdictional conflict to perform interdependent routine tasks. The authors examine how professionals adapt established routines by analyzing the new interactions and interdependent actions required to accomplish technology-mediated geriatric consultation routines. The findings of this study show that professionals create new patterns of actions that are shaped by relational forms of professional expertise, namely selective and blending expertise. The findings and theoretical insights contribute to the literature on routine dynamics by highlighting the importance of relational expertise, and showing how it can transform and destabilize otherwise established professional routines.

This chapter uses the expertise literature (e.g., Ericsson et al., 2018; Ericsson & Pool, 2016) to explore ways that entrepreneurship education might be enhanced through the deliberate practice of specific entrepreneurial behaviors and cognitive skills. What is appealing about the use of expertise methods and theory is the application of very rigorous standards for improving behavioral and cognitive skills that are correlated to better outcomes. The authors suggest that an expertise approach challenges entrepreneurship educators to identify what aspects of the entrepreneurial process might be “deliberately practiced” and to consider modifying aspects of training entrepreneurs to better develop their entrepreneurial capabilities.

This chapter investigates the effects of gender stereotypes on expectations about expertise and task assignments. We present a theoretical model that predicts and explains the pervasive and self-reinforcing effects of gender-based stereotypes on expected knowledge and task assignments in groups. In the model, stereotypes influence expertise recognition, which influences tasks assignments. Task assignments provide group members with task experience and expertise. Expertise influences expertise recognition, making the model cyclical. Expertise gained from task experience also affects stereotypes, creating a cycle that reinforces stereotypes. We describe findings from a program of research designed to examine ways of breaking this self-reinforcing cycle, which investigates the effectiveness of various types of expertise claims made by people with expertise, that is inconsistent with stereotypical expectations. We consider the implications of our theory and data for effects of status on evaluation of expertise claims in work groups.

When the history of the financial crisis, stock market crash, and ensuing recession of 2007–2009 is written, the appropriate focus would be on the role that “expertise” played in almost every chapter of the story. From the expertise of the mathematicians who guided the models used by financial institutions, to the expertise of those who developed new kinds of mortgage instruments that required very low down payments, to the expertise of US policymakers who told us that new regulations to encourage more widespread homeownership would be an engine of economic growth and prosperity, the actions of those who knew better eventually littered the financial landscape with their errors. In addition to the prior list, which is hardly exhaustive, perhaps the most central set of experts in the story were those associated with the Federal Reserve System, the US central bank. The Fed rarely shies away from using its expertise to cloak its choices in a cloud of jargon and technicalities, even as its every move has significant effects across the US economy and the whole globe. The Fed's decisions to keep interest rates so low after 9/11 and to seize unprecedented powers in the wake of the recession that inevitably followed that earlier policy were both the latest examples of the history of the Fed's ever-increasing claims to expertise that have led to expanding powers and new and more damaging mistakes.

Higher education research is replete with discussion of boundaries imagined as structural constraints in need of removal or circumvention. But, while foregrounding national–transnational frameworks, leadership strategising and institutional structures, the scholarship is subdued about how boundaries are actually dealt with at ground level. How do practitioners come together, day by day, across higher education boundaries; and what is required for desirable practices to be nurtured? It is on this issue, and in particular the theorisation of this issue, that this chapter will focus.

This chapter presents and develops a relational working framework, based on the work of Anne Edwards. We highlight three core concepts (common knowledge, relational expertise and relational agency), disaggregating each into constituent features. We then apply the framework to reinterpret previously published empirical studies, to demonstrate its broad applicability. We argue that the framework usefully conceptualises how practitioners work with others across boundaries; that it helps us to notice how many boundaries are, in fact, routinely permeated; and that it usefully highlights important aspects of local practices that are easily obscured.