Micro-Foundation of Knowledge Creation Theory: Development of a Conceptual Framework Theory
- PDF / 448,992 Bytes
- 17 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 57 Downloads / 190 Views
Micro-Foundation of Knowledge Creation Theory: Development of a Conceptual Framework Theory Sunday Bolade 1 & Stavros Sindakis 2,3 Received: 9 March 2019 / Accepted: 30 October 2019/ # Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019
Abstract Knowledge, unlike commodities, is touted to grant sustainable competitive advantage by its tacitness, inimitability, and immobility. Yet, knowledge creation theory took off on a wrong footing, on the typological conversion model, and on the assumption that organization is a living organism. We posit that conversion of one knowledge typology to another cannot and should not be the basis of knowledge creation theory. Moreover, the organismic assumption of an organization misleads scholars into assuming the organization as the locus of knowledge creation. Thus, there is a need for a paradigm shift if knowledge management (KM) field will succeed. In light of this, the psychocognitive perspective (PCP) on knowledge creation (KC) is presented to provide microlevel foundations on personalized KC. The PCP is based on thinking processes that builds and utilizes a triad relationship (of the brain, mind, and action) to invoke thinking activities (primary and secondary thinking processes) in the two hemispheres of our brain for synthesizing knowledge. Humans are always enmeshed in activities that enable them to make a profiting impact. While some activities draw on the intellective skill of reading, observing, and watching, others are rooted in mechanistic actions like repairing of breakdown cars, kneading the dough, and archery. Through focal attention, the former yield explicit knowledge, and the latter tacit knowledge. However, at the subconscious level, both produce opposite knowledge typologies, tacit and explicit, respectively. Keywords Psycho-cognitive perspective . Knowledge creation theory . Mental model .
Collective knowledge
* Sunday Bolade [email protected] Stavros Sindakis [email protected]; [email protected] Extended author information available on the last page of the article
Journal of the Knowledge Economy
Introduction The increasing turbulent environment now forces knowledge management (KM), though an emerging field, into the heart of the mainstream services, research, innovation, and new product development (NPD) across sectors and industries. Thus, it is fast gaining increasing attention and support from both the academic and business communities as more organizations now create KM desks, and economic sectors demand knowledge-creative workers to help them navigate the current turbulent, market environment via creating a blue ocean market space. Unfortunately, however, this mission remains a mirage. This is particularly so because, at both governmental and business fronts, leaders fail to deliver results as a proof of possessing knowledge (Denford 2013). Also, employees lacking in tacit knowledge tend to lag, while those lacking in superior explicit knowledge are strategically weak to evolve functional path to innovation and economi
Data Loading...
