Discourses of knowledge across global networks: what can be learnt about knowledge leadership from the ATLAS collaboration?

Writing on knowledge management (KM) and leadership studies tends to take place in parallel; both fields are prolific yet they rarely inform each other. A KM view tends to take a positional view of leaders and a functionalist view of firms: so it regards those with the ascription or status of leaders as pivotal, and knowledge as a commodity to be leveraged with the help of leaders to improve firm performance. But as the global reach of organizations in the knowledge-based economy become more stretched, as their operations become more networked and as their workforces become more mobile, the task of deploying and deriving value from knowledge becomes ever more challenging and calls for a qualitatively different approach which is termed knowledge leadership. In contrast to the instrumentalist approach of KM we offer some alternative discourses of knowledge and explore the implications of these for knowledge leadership. We then use interpretive discourse to examine the way knowledge activists enact and experience the exchange of knowledge in the ATLAS collaboration, part of the largest scientific experiment in the world at the Large Hadron Collider, near Geneva. We find this apparently democratic and homogeneous global network to be populated by quite different perceptions concerning the way knowledge is viewed, the way knowledge leadership is exercised and the impact of this on the global collaboration. We discuss the wider significance of these findings for knowledge leadership in other international knowledge-based enterprises and R&D businesses

Building Firm Foundations Sure Start Mellow Valley Evaluation Report 2005/ 2006

This report forms the Year 3 annual report. Alongside documenting findings from Year 2 evaluation activities, this report also brings together findings from previous evaluation activities and gives wider consideration to the overall progress and outcomes of the programme so far. Section two explains the evaluation approach that has been adopted and details the activities that have been conducted and the methods used. Section 3 highlights the key themes and findings to emerge from the workshops undertaken with the Sure Start teams and provides a summary of the indepth evaluation conducted of the Family Support Team. Section 4 is entitled ‘Pulling it all together’ and considers the work and achievements of Sure Start Mellow Valley with particular regard to the five outcomes of Every Child Matters. A conclusion and brief summary of findings is found in Section 5 followed by a range of further information within the Section 6 Appendices

Making sense of joint commissioning: three discourses of prevention, empowerment and efficiency

Background: In recent years joint commissioning has assumed an important place in the policy and practice of English health and social care. Yet, despite much being claimed for this way of working there is a lack of evidence to demonstrate the outcomes of joint commissioning. This paper examines the types of impacts that have been claimed for joint commissioning within the literature. Method: The paper reviews the extant literature concerning joint commissioning employing an interpretive schema to examine the different meanings afforded to this concept. The paper reviews over 100 documents that discuss joint commissioning, adopting an interpretive approach which sought to identify a series of discourses, each of which view the processes and outcomes of joint commissioning differently. Results: This paper finds that although much has been written about joint commissioning there is little evidence to link it to changes in outcomes. Much of the evidence base focuses on the processes of joint commissioning and few studies have systematically studied the outcomes of this way of working. Further, there does not appear to be one single definition of joint commissioning and it is used in a variety of different ways across health and social care. The paper identifies three dominant discourses of joint commissioning – prevention, empowerment and efficiency. Each of these offers a different way of seeing joint commissioning and suggests that it should achieve different aims. Conclusions: There is a lack of clarity not only in terms of what joint commissioning has been demonstrated to achieve but even in terms of what it should achieve. Joint commissioning is far from a clear concept with a number of different potential meanings. Although this ambiguity can be helpful in some ways in the sense that it can bring together disparate groups, for example, if joint commissioning is to be delivered at a local level then more specificity may be required in terms of what they are being asked to deliver

Making sense of variety in place leadership: the case of England’s smart cities

Making sense of variety in place leadership: the case of England’s smart cities. Regional Studies. There is rising interest in cities becoming ‘smart’ knowledge-oriented economies by prioritizing more digitally enabled modes of production and service delivery. Whilst the prevalence of these new organizational forms is well understood, the way that leadership agency is exercised (i.e., the actors involved and their modalities of action) is not. Drawing on new empirical data and sense-making methodology, the paper reveals discursive patterns in how public agencies, private firms and communities ‘see’ and ‘do’ leadership within these place-based contexts, and concludes that success in exploiting the social and spatial dynamics of ‘smart’ development lies in understanding actors’ assumptions about commercial and social gain

Making sense of joint commissioning: three discourses of prevention, empowerment and efficiency

Background: In recent years joint commissioning has assumed an important place in the policy and practice of English health and social care. Yet, despite much being claimed for this way of working there is a lack of evidence to demonstrate the outcomes of joint commissioning. This paper examines the types of impacts that have been claimed for joint commissioning within the literature. Method: The paper reviews the extant literature concerning joint commissioning employing an interpretive schema to examine the different meanings afforded to this concept. The paper reviews over 100 documents that discuss joint commissioning, adopting an interpretive approach which sought to identify a series of discourses, each of which view the processes and outcomes of joint commissioning differently. Results: This paper finds that although much has been written about joint commissioning there is little evidence to link it to changes in outcomes. Much of the evidence base focuses on the processes of joint commissioning and few studies have systematically studied the outcomes of this way of working. Further, there does not appear to be one single definition of joint commissioning and it is used in a variety of different ways across health and social care. The paper identifies three dominant discourses of joint commissioning – prevention, empowerment and efficiency. Each of these offers a different way of seeing joint commissioning and suggests that it should achieve different aims. Conclusions: There is a lack of clarity not only in terms of what joint commissioning has been demonstrated to achieve but even in terms of what it should achieve. Joint commissioning is far from a clear concept with a number of different potential meanings. Although this ambiguity can be helpful in some ways in the sense that it can bring together disparate groups, for example, if joint commissioning is to be delivered at a local level then more specificity may be required in terms of what they are being asked to deliver

Relational knowledge leadership and local economic development

This paper concerns the role of spatial leadership in the development of the knowledge-based economy. It is argued within academic and practitioner circles that leadership of knowledge networks requires a particular non-hierarchical style that is required to establish an ambience conducive to networking and knowledge sharing across boundaries. In this paper, we explore this hypothesis at both theoretical and empirical levels. Theoretically, we propose a conceptualization of relational knowledge leadership, which is ‘nomadic’ in its capacity to travel across multiple scales and cross sectoral, thematic and geographical boundaries. We have operationalized this type of relational knowledge leadership along four key features, derived from literatures on regional learning, organizational leadership and place leadership. Two empirical case studies are then presented, one from Birmingham in the UK and one from Eindhoven in the Netherlands, exploring how these features are expressed on the sub-national level. Also conclusions are drawn regarding the status of relational knowledge leadership. It is argued that the concept of relational knowledge leadership as viewed through our analytical lens does accord with the experience of leadership in the two cases presented. The cases also show that this style of leadership is confronted with three types of tensions that play through knowledge networking. Furthermore, it is argued that the cases exhibit this style of leadership to different degrees, reflecting their different cultural and political context

The way we do things around here: personal and epistemological reflexivity on the inter-disciplinary nature of research into tackling inequality through regeneration

This chapter seeks to examine the ways in which university-based researchers can facilitate the understanding and awareness of public policy-makers and key decision-makers in the contribution to theory and complexity research can make to contemporary public policy. The chapter provides a systematic literature review informed by reference to key urban regeneration strategies in the United Kingdom. The chapter argues that it is through the promotion of inter-disciplinary approaches to understanding and learning that we might develop the reflective capacities of decision-makers. The chapter is intentionally speculative and seeks to encourage critical self-reflection

Making sense of the complexity of managerial flow: the case of urban regeneration in the UK

The idea that managerial flow incorporates the managerial assets and actions involved in the policy implementation process highlights the importance of paying attention to more complex matters of strategy, governance, selection, coordination and communication as potential gaps (Vechi and Brusoni 2012). Part of the value of articulating the decision making process in this more nuanced way is that it challenges overly- rationalist assumptions that the policy decision making process occurs in a linear and sequential way and that decision making process is rooted in mathematical logic – i.e. that a + b = c (all of which leads to an expectation of reaching a singular outcome on grounds that ‘rational choice drives self-interest’) (Stone 2002). In keeping with the idea that not only is reality more complex; but that there are a much wider range of actors involved (Arganoff and Mcguire 1998); and that this is based on networks of collaboration (Ansell and Gash 2007), we argue that by also paying attention to the importance of values in the framing and evaluation of policy, we can consider the human interpretation involved, in addition to the context

Making sense of urban policy in complex times

Alyson Nicholds argues that critical approaches to discourse analysis have the capacity to unearth assumptions lying behind shifting patterns of governance which bring a hegemonic, market-informed mentality to every aspect of regeneration practic

The impact of joint commissioning

This chapter explores: - The nature of joint commissioning and the claims made for its potential impact; - a brief history of joint commissioning; - the evidence base behind joint commissioning; - key drivers and possible outcomes