Facts, skills and intuition : A typology of personal knowledge

This paper introduces a knowledge model in which the types of knowledge are formed according to the nature of knowledge. First we use Ryle’s distinction of “that” and “how” knowledge, to which we add further three types. The five knowledge types are then synthesized using Polanyi’s distinction of focal and subsidiary awareness. The resulting model distinguishes three types of knowledge, the facts, the skills, and the intuition; all three having focal and subsidiary parts. We believe that this knowledge model is comprehensive in the sense that can classify any knowledge and it also has great explanatory power, as it is demonstrated through illustrative examples. Moreover, the model is elegant and easy to use, which facilitates our understanding of the domain of personal knowledge. Therefore we expect our findings to be useful for both researchers and educators in the field of knowledge and knowledge management

Understanding intuition : the case for two forms of intuition

Since the recent rejuvenation of intuition research within the management literature, significant work has been done on conceptualizing intuition. Whilst remarkable progress has been achieved concerning many aspects of intuition, the role of intuition in creativity remains comparatively under-researched. Through an extensive review of intuition literature, including but also going beyond the management field, we believe that a reason for this could be that intuition in the management literature is generally conceptualized as judgement. In this paper we aim to extend our understanding of intuition in creativity by introducing the concept of intuitive insight. Augmenting the literature and further strengthening the case this paper builds off two previous research projects. The first project focuses on presenting a comprehensive set of features of intuition based on the literature and the second builds a conceptual model of knowledge types. Further informing the research presented in this paper is Polanyi’s distinction of focal and subsidiary awareness. These four considerations lead us to propose that there are two kinds of intuition – intuitive judgement and intuitive insight

Understanding intuitive knowledge

The purpose of this paper is to improve our understanding of intuition of individuals in an or-ganisational setting. To achieve this, we draw on a wide range of literature which we synthesise to provide a coherent view of intuition. From reviewing the literature on intuition we identify characteristics that appear to be commonly accepted and, based on these characteristics we propose that there are two kinds of intuition – intuitive judgment and intuitive insight. We add Polanyi’s conceptualisation of focal and subsidiary awareness to the two kinds of intuition and, by doing so, we describe the structure of intuition. Finally we try to make use of our improved understanding of intuition through re-examining the question of how intuition can be improved

Contrasting GDSS\u27s and GSS\u27s in the context of strategic change-implications for facilitation

The focus of this paper is on a comparison made between two series of computer supported strategy workshops. Each of the series of five one-day workshops was designed within the context of a project aimed at planning and implementing major strategic change within the organization and the project reported involved over fifty senior managers during a two year period. The subjects of the research had to deal with the reality of an organisational history, and, even more importantly, the knowledge that their contributions to the meetings would influence their future as a managerial group. The project enabled a number of exceptional opportunities to be tapped including i) a researcher as observer throughout the process, and ii) videotaping of each one day meeting. The first series of workshops was designed to generate and structure the strategic issues and context that were to be worked upon during the second series of workshops. Thus the first workshops used a group support system designed toprovide high levels of participation in raising strategic issues, and the second series, a group decision support system designed to enable decisions to be made and implementation plans to be created. These design objectives closely correspond to the tasks set out by McGrath (1984) where a GSS was defined as a support system to primarily aid creativity/idea generating tasks and a GDSS was to support planning/evaluation tasks. The workshops were each embedded within the Strategic Options Development and Analysis methodology (SODA) (Eden and Ackermann, 1992) and, involved a number of different support technologies. In these workshops the usual facilitated procedure was used in tandem with a multiple workstation system which allowed participants to interact with the modelling process, and with a number of manual techniques which were designed to interface with the approach. Thus manual group support (MAGS) was used alongside, and interacting with, both facilitator driven single user group support (SUGS) and multi-user group support (MUGS). To achieve this interweaving of modes the software COPE was used directly in both the SUGS and MUGS modes of support and the underlying concepts used during the MAGS mode mirrors the COPE software. The difference between the two series of workshops comprised i) the purposes behind the usage of each mode of working, and ii) the combinations adopted, i.e. the choice of using particular modes in a particular order which both have implications for facilitation. As a result of the comparison a set of implications which differentiate the role of a facilitator using group support systems (GSS) to the use of group decision support systems (GDSS) has been produced. The implications may be taken firstly as a contribution to the future design and facilitation of each type of meeting, and secondly to the effective design of the each of the systems (GSS and GDSS). The paper begins by considering some of the issues around the research method adopted, provides details of both of the workshop series, lists the characteristics which emerged as a result of the workshops and have implications for facilitation, and then briefly touches on the conclusions

Theory into practice, practice to theory: Action research in method development

The purpose of this paper is threefold. Firstly, although there have been many articles and books describing the nature of Action Research there are few examples of doing it in practice. We describe how a Research Oriented Action Research programme unfolded over many years focussing on the operationalisation of theory alongside the development of a soft-OR methodology. An outcome of this programme was the refinement of an Action Research method. Secondly, we present the development of an understanding of emergent strategy – a ‘theory’ that attracted both the researchers and managers in a number of organisations as one that could enhance the development of a soft-OR method and aid the process of strategy making. In doing so we demonstrate how research can be both rigorous and relevant. We also developed our understanding of emergent strategy in a manner that enables it to be used in practice. And thirdly, we show how the soft-OR method of Strategic Options Development and Analysis (SODA) methodology gradually became a strategy making methodology (Journey Making). Although much has been written describing the background to these soft-OR methodologies, this paper shows how and why they developed. We illustrate how relevant theory from a range of disciplines can inform practice, and how the process of implementing theory into method develops theory

Exploring GSS negotiation – the use of a GSS log

Group Decision Support Systems (GSS) have been used extensively to support groups in working together in organizations. This paper focuses on the particular type of GSS, called Group Explorer, which during the course of facilitated sessions generates data logs in the form of Excel spreadsheets. Data logs can be of high interest to researchers and GSS facilitators because they may possibly contain rich and valuable data such as about the detailed time of entry and the authorship of all contributions, or the results of voting activities conducted by participants. However, data logs may at first look complicated and difficult to read and follow. Thus the purpose of this paper is to provide a number of instructions and explanations for anyone interested in making good use of data logs, and to popularize similar analysis as a good opportunity to bet-ter understand the outcomes of GSS sessions

Discovering Collaborative Advantage: The Contributions of Goal Categories and Visual Strategy Mapping

Collaboration can make sense when there is some sort of “collaborative advantage” to be gained, meaning organizations can achieve something together that they cannot easily achieve by themselves. However, the literature is essentially silent on how to identify collaborative advantage. This article addresses this shortcoming in the theory of collaborative advantage for public purposes by proposing a set of goal categories that may be used to help articulate collaborative advantage and introducing the use of visual strategy mapping as part of a facilitated group process to figure out what the collaborative advantage might be. Collaborative advantage, as it is normally understood, consists of shared core goals. Collaborative advantage for public purposes should take into account public values beyond shared core goals