From the Publisher:
This book brings together the research of a number of scholars in the field of knowledge creation and imparts a sense of order to the field. The chapters share three characteristics: they are all grounded in extensive qualitative and/or quantitative research; they all go beyond the mere description of the knowledge-creation process and offer both theoretical and strategic implications; they share a view of knowledge creation and knowledge transfer as delicate processes, necessitating particular forms of support from managers.
Organizational knowledge creation is the process of making available and amplifying knowledge created by individuals as well as crystallizing and connecting it to an organization's knowledge system. In other words, what individuals come to know in their (work-)life benefits their colleagues and, eventually, the larger organization. The theory explaining this process — the organizational knowledge creation theory — has developed rapidly in academia and been broadly diffused in management practice over the last 15 years. This article reviews the theory's central elements and identifies the evolving paths taken by academic work that uses the theory as a point of departure. The article furthermore proposes areas in which future research can advance the theory of organizational knowledge creation.
In the face of increasing uncertainty and changes, corporations must dynamically examine their business environment and activate the knowledge creation process in a future-oriented manner without getting hung up on analyzing their past (much like driving a car using only the rear-view mirror). In the previous article, we discussed the basics of scenario planning. We should not use this tool as a mere technique. Our knowledge of the world and the environment around us is important because it underlies our scenarios. When we look toward the future in an uncertain environment, we necessarily create knowledge proactively. Scenario planning and knowledge creation are commonplace when working on knowledge of innovations that shape the future. In this article we focus on the importance of having "scenario mind," the philosophy underlying scenario planning. With any managerial tool, you cannot create real knowledge if you use only superficial know-how, like procedures described in manuals, to seek quick results. In the following sections, we discuss how scenario planning must be recognized as a "discipline of knowledge" to be embedded as a way of thinking and behavioral pattern of each individual or organization, not as a mere tool.
Abstract The growing interest in organizational learning concepts and theories has generated a rapid proliferation of approaches, tools, and techniques of learning. Thus, the common objective of all the authors in this part is to draw on theories, empirical research, and authors’ practical experience to provide practitioners with an ‘architecture’ of organizational learning practices. Each chapter elaborates on this architecture and suggests corresponding tools and techniques of learning to develop and apply.
The art and science of technology and innovation management has been theorized by many management scholars over the past several decades. This symposium attempts to discuss and integrate some of the most important concepts of technology and innovation management. In particular, the symposium revisits the contributions of knowledge management, collaborative community of firms, dynamic capabilities, and open innovation to argue how these theories apply for today’s complex situation of technology and innovation management. At the same time, the symposium looks at how they would provide an outlook towards the potential challenges, barriers and opportunities of future businesses. We believe that this symposium aims to further deepen our understanding of management theories, with a particular emphasis on the openness of organizations and markets to co-create values as a part of the conference theme,
If dealing with wuli–shili–renli is what pragmatic managers do, how to do it? Readers familiar with the literature would say this question is about strategy process. We agree, but with an immediate qualification: pragmatically speaking, process cannot be properly understood if separated from contexts or contents – who you are, where you come from, what you want to achieve.
'%3e%3ccircle r='20' fill='%23008'/%3e%3ccircle r='17.5' fill='%23fff'/%3e%3ccircle r='3.5' fill='%23008'/%3e%3cg id='d'%3e%3cg id='c'%3e%3cg id='b'%3e%3cg id='a' fill='%23008'%3e%3ccircle r='.875' transform='rotate(7.5 -8.75 133.5)'/%3e%3cpath d='M0 17.5.6 7 0 2l-.6 5L0 17.5z'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23a' transform='rotate(15)'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23b' transform='rotate(30)'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23c' transform='rotate(60)'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23d' transform='rotate(120)'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23d' transform='rotate(-120)'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)
