Change Of Routines: A Multi-Level Analysis

This paper analyses how organizational routines change. It focuses on the level of learning groups within organizations. The paper starts with a summary of the 'activity theory' of knowledge used. Next, the notion of scripts is used, to analyse organizational groups as 'systems of distributed cognition', and to identify different levels of routines and their change. Finally, the paper looks at communication routines or rules needed for different levels of change, in the formation of new 'shared beliefs'.organizational change;organizational learning;evolution;routines;scripts

Social Structures for Learning

This article investigates what learning groups there are in organizations, other than the familiar 'communities of practice'. It first develops an interdisciplinary theoretical framework for identifying, categorizing and understanding learning groups. For this, it employs a constructivist, interactionist theory of knowledge and learning. It employs elements of transaction cost theory and of social theory of trust. Transaction cost economics neglects learning and trust, but elements of the theory are still useful. The framework is used in an empirical study in a consultancy company, to explore what learning groups there are, and to see if our theory can explain their functioning and their success or failure.learning groups;social theory of trust;theory of knowledge and learning;transaction cost theory

Effects of multiple network ties Knowledge transfer and sharing in a network: The effects of multipleties

The aim of this paper is to contribute to the discussion on the issue of when knowledge leaks between various groups and when knowledge sticks within one learning group. Theoretical insights propose that one needs strong ties for knowledge transfer and sharing. A preliminary case study, however, suggests that strong ties with people outside the learning group can hinder learning within a group. These observations suggest that strong ties outside a group are not the only condition which facilitates knowledge transfer and sharing. The same case study suggests that for knowledge sharing the various groups should differ in their adopted task and topic

Social Structures for Learning

This article investigates what learning groups there are in organizations, other than the familiar 'communities of practice'. It first develops an interdisciplinary theoretical framework for identifying, categorizing and understanding learning groups. For this, it employs a constructivist, interactionist theory of knowledge and learning. It employs elements of transaction cost theory and of social theory of trust. Transaction cost economics neglects learning and trust, but elements of the theory are still useful. The framework is used in an empirical study in a consultancy company, to explore what learning groups there are, and to see if our theory can explain their functioning and their success or failure

Change Of Routines: A Multi-Level Analysis

This paper analyses how organizational routines change. It focuses on the level of learning groups within organizations. The paper starts with a summary of the 'activity theory' of knowledge used. Next, the notion of scripts is used, to analyse organizational groups as 'systems of distributed cognition', and to identify different levels of routines and their change. Finally, the paper looks at communication routines or rules needed for different levels of change, in the formation of new 'shared beliefs'

Multiple Inclusion and Community Networks

Community membership has changed over the last decades. Most people participate in different communities simultaneously in order to satisfy different individual interests. This network individualism might threaten the sustainability of modern communities, like communities of practice (CoPs). In this paper we discuss the consequences of this notion for membership in a community. The unit of analysis in this paper is not a ‘stand-alone’ community of practice but the multiple included individual as a node of various networks. This multiple inclusion is deemed to be important for the knowledge sharing between different CoPs. Taking this idea into account our analyses reveals the need to redefine the concept of ‘legitimacy’ in a community. Our underlying assumption is that broadening legitimacies facilitates multiple inclusion of an individual and, in this way, supports the sustainability of a community of practice

Effects of multiple network ties Knowledge transfer and sharing in a network: The effects of multipleties

The aim of this paper is to contribute to the discussion on the issue of when knowledge leaks between various groups and when knowledge sticks within one learning group. Theoretical insights propose that one needs strong ties for knowledge transfer and sharing. A preliminary case study, however, suggests that strong ties with people outside the learning group can hinder learning within a group. These observations suggest that strong ties outside a group are not the only condition which facilitates knowledge transfer and sharing. The same case study suggests that for knowledge sharing the various groups should differ in their adopted task and topic.groups differentiated according to topic and task;various ties in a social network;knowledge sharing in a group;knowledge transfer from outside a group

Multiple Inclusion and Community Networks

Community membership has changed over the last decades. Most people participate in different communities simultaneously in order to satisfy different individual interests. This network individualism might threaten the sustainability of modern communities, like communities of practice (CoPs). In this paper we discuss the consequences of this notion for membership in a community. The unit of analysis in this paper is not a ‘stand-alone’ community of practice but the multiple included individual as a node of various networks. This multiple inclusion is deemed to be important for the knowledge sharing between different CoPs. Taking this idea into account our analyses reveals the need to redefine the concept of ‘legitimacy’ in a community. Our underlying assumption is that broadening legitimacies facilitates multiple inclusion of an individual and, in this way, supports the sustainability of a community of practice.social ties;community of practice;multiple inclusion;network bridges;network individualism;partial inclusion