The Persistence of Omniscience in Knowledge Management: Implications or Future Research

Abstract: This paper demonstrates the persistence of omniscience in Knowledge Management (KM) research. Omniscience as a concept has two dimensions ubiquity and utility. This idea of ubiquity is more prevalent when the management goal focuses on processing or transferring pre-existing knowledge efficiently to those who can make use of it. Ubiquity assumes that knowledge is freely available within the firm i.e. is omnipresent, waiting for it to be processed or transferred. The idea of utility assumes that knowledge and its relevance is fully understood by the firm. The firms and its managers are assumed to know the value and quality of knowledge, who needs it, how it should be processed and where it should be transferred to. In short , the firm is assumed to be \u27all-knowing\u27 or omniscient. This paper outlines how the persistence of omniscience underpins the hegemony of the information processing paradigm and transfer research agendas in KM research. We argue that it does so at the expense of considering alternative theories and perspectives. We illustrate how omniscience continues to underpin the dominant theory of knowledge creation i.e. the SECI Model. At face value the SECI model assumes that the firm is a site for the creation of new knowledge. However, on closer inspection, by cross-examining the assumptions of convertibility and amplification within the SECI Model, we outline how the assumption of omniscience hampers the application of this theory to meet its goal for the creation of new knowledge. We illustrate how a departure from the assumption of omniscience will allow for additional avenues of research and address calls for broader perspectives in KM. One such avenue, knowledge-as-process, which focuses on open innovation, creativity and the creating of knowledge overtime is proposed. Th

Curriculum Development for the Delivery of a Standardised Business Research Methods Module

The goal of this project is to provide a framework for a revised delivery of Research Methods across the College of Business. This project considers a number of issues and misconceptions that needed to be overcome regarding the delivery of Research Methods (RM) as a module and the recognitions of RM as a discipline. This includes the misconception that “commonality” of the student cohort was required for the delivery of RM and the issue of student disengagement. The outputs of this project are Module Descriptors for a generalised Research Report, case studies representing best practice in other institutions and the introduction of the Research Skills Development Framework through pedagogic development

The generative routine dynamics of internship/work placements : an exploration of process dynamics facilitating knowledge creating

The role of knowledge in organisations has tended to be considered in the context of its transfer and to a lesser extent its creation. The university-industry relationship is predominantly relied on as an appropriate context for these discussions. However little by way of scholarly attention has focused on the concept of 'knowledge creating' per se or addresses the research question "how can organisational processes facilitate knowledge creating over time?" This research introduces and explores the concept of 'knowledge creating' within an often ignored and under researched theory-practice context - the internship/work placement. Routines theory, and its generative claim, is relied on here to address the processual attribute associated with 'knowledge creating'. Dialogicality has also been identified as an attribute of 'knowledge creating'. This is understood as a sensitivity to otherness that leads to social interaction within dialogical exchanges. Consequently, the objective of this study becomes a question of unpacking process dynamics or generative routine dynamics by using a dialogical theory for knowledge creation. Dialogical exchanges that facilitate continuous articulations and productive relational engagement are assessed with dynamic aspects of routines. By combining routines theory with dialogicality a novel and robust conceptual lens guiding data collection and analysis is provided. Data was collected over four separate internship/placement cycles in Ireland's largest business school during the financial crisis from 2008 to 2014. A plurality of methods was employed for data collection; which included over 60 interviews, 18 hours of direct observation, and 50 separated documentary artifacts. Combined these minimise fragmented descriptions of the internship/placement, while highlighting novel processual dynamics that have previously been overlooked in empirical routines research. The empirical findings highlight three interlinked dualities which contribute to a nuanced understanding of generative routine dynamics; the presence/absence duality; the centrality/peripherality duality and the evaluating/quality duality. When combined these dualities reveal how dialogical exchanges can lead to continuous articulations, which in turn become productive when resulting in action. From this we gain an insight in what we understand as knowledge creating.The role of knowledge in organisations has tended to be considered in the context of its transfer and to a lesser extent its creation. The university-industry relationship is predominantly relied on as an appropriate context for these discussions. However little by way of scholarly attention has focused on the concept of 'knowledge creating' per se or addresses the research question "how can organisational processes facilitate knowledge creating over time?" This research introduces and explores the concept of 'knowledge creating' within an often ignored and under researched theory-practice context - the internship/work placement. Routines theory, and its generative claim, is relied on here to address the processual attribute associated with 'knowledge creating'. Dialogicality has also been identified as an attribute of 'knowledge creating'. This is understood as a sensitivity to otherness that leads to social interaction within dialogical exchanges. Consequently, the objective of this study becomes a question of unpacking process dynamics or generative routine dynamics by using a dialogical theory for knowledge creation. Dialogical exchanges that facilitate continuous articulations and productive relational engagement are assessed with dynamic aspects of routines. By combining routines theory with dialogicality a novel and robust conceptual lens guiding data collection and analysis is provided. Data was collected over four separate internship/placement cycles in Ireland's largest business school during the financial crisis from 2008 to 2014. A plurality of methods was employed for data collection; which included over 60 interviews, 18 hours of direct observation, and 50 separated documentary artifacts. Combined these minimise fragmented descriptions of the internship/placement, while highlighting novel processual dynamics that have previously been overlooked in empirical routines research. The empirical findings highlight three interlinked dualities which contribute to a nuanced understanding of generative routine dynamics; the presence/absence duality; the centrality/peripherality duality and the evaluating/quality duality. When combined these dualities reveal how dialogical exchanges can lead to continuous articulations, which in turn become productive when resulting in action. From this we gain an insight in what we understand as knowledge creating

Using Internship Design to Shape Sustainable University-Industry Relationships:a Research Agenda?

This discursive article considers models and types of internships internationally and how particular models can be used as a strategic tool to shape effective university-industry partnerships. It argues why research into the nature, purpose and impact of internships in industry partnerships is urgently required

The Concept of \u27Knowledge Creating\u27: Re-conceptualising the Problems of Knowledge Transfer and Creation Processually

How knowledge is created remains the subject of much debate (Kuhn, 1962). In fields of management, organisation studies and knowledge management, the hegemonic approach to studying the role of knowledge in management, and how it comes into being has predominantly been influenced by a knowledge transfer agenda. Recent attempts to explore a specific theory of knowledge creation (Nonaka, 1994) per se, have continued to rely on assumptions inherited from this knowledge transfer agenda. Here ‘events of transfer’ have been replaced with an emphasis on ‘events of creation’ suggesting that events of organisational knowledge creation require similar solutions to those addressing problems of knowledge transfer. This presents theoretical, philosophical and indeed methodological problems for researchers who argue different and often conflicting understandings of what ‘knowledge’ is and how it comes into being

Engaged Scholarship: How to Improve University Engagement within Academic-Industry Relationships

Since the notion of engaged scholarship was articulated and debated (Van de Ven, 2007, McKelvey, 2006, Van De Ven and Johnson, 2006b, Van De Ven and Johnson, 2006a) it has received increased scholarly attention, informed debates questioning the role of the university in society, and how universities produce relevant knowledge for and with society. While questions are raised about how an engaged scholarship lens might meaningfully improve academic-industry relationships, less attention has focused on the characteristics of engagement that can illustrate why one form of relationship in practice is more “engaged” compared to another. The engaged scholarship lens distances itself from efforts to theorise a knowledge transfer solution to narrowing conceptualised divides between academic and industry. Using this distinction as a foundation for characterising how we might improve such relationships, this paper compares and contrasts different solutions to better explore how knowledge is disseminated within and across academic-industry boundaries. To do so we draw upon knowledge transfer literature and relationship marketing’s understanding of inter-organisational relationships. We further explore the implications this approach might have for the role of the university and its ability to produce knowledge for and with society (Gibbons et al 1994). We draw upon the activities of the newly formed Technological University of Dublin (TU Dublin) as it attempts to position itself as a truly “engaged university”. The challenges in restructuring and repositioning TU Dublin to achieve this status focuses on its support for engaged research, community engagement and widening participation activities within the context of its organisational redesign initiative (2019-2022). This paper concludes by providing insights into how we can improve meaningful engagement. The implications of a transfer solution to academic-industry relationships for redesign is compared to a solution based on engaged scholarship. How either solution draws on aspects of knowledge management is discussed. We advocate for a deeper understanding of knowledge management based on engaged scholarship principles and illustrate how it differs from a knowledge management perspective based on assumptions of transfer in a context of organisational redesign

Knowledge Creating Routines: Dialogical Exchanges to Guide Repertoires of Potential Action

We substantiate how generative routines, from a dialogical exchange perspective, guide repertoires of potential actions. Research on generative and emergent qualities of organisational routines, and their ability to assist actors arriving at new distinctions in practice, remains underdeveloped. Researchers have established that routines have the qualities of being generative, emergent and producers of ideas. Recent contributions argue for a dialogical approach to creating new organisational knowledge. This paper further develops the explanatory power of routines by combining dialogical exchanges within the ostensive-performative theory of routines. We examine the power of dialogical exchanges using words, understood as imaginal others within schemas, and text within artifacts, as a basis for a processual view appropriate for studying ‘knowledge creating’. We analyse data from a multi-level analysis in a university-industry context crossing the theory-practice divide. We find that words and texts within productive dialogical exchanges are influenced and shaped by perceived quality and presence of central artifacts and imaginal others. When they coalesce and are intertwined they coordinate guidance in routines. The combination and recombination of these assemblages coalesce and guide repertoires of potential actions. Through this we gain an improved understanding of generative routines and in turn how knowledge creating occurs

University interactions: Forms, peculiarities and tensions

Interactions between university and industry or society mainly occur in the form of transfer and/or collaborations. However, both forms have mostly been discussed as transfer thus, the underpinnings of both forms are not often discussed. As a result, the tensions (contradictions, dialectics and paradoxes) embedded in the interactions are also overlooked (not explored). This paper proposes to explore the underpinnings of the both forms of interaction and the tensions therein. Transfer is often linked with incubation and acceleration with concerns around absorption and diffusion of knowledge and through channels such as publications, conferences, teaching and pedagogy, joint research and knowledge networks. It focuses on how to improve the unidirectional flow of knowledge (university to industry) with the aim to reduce rather than accept the tensions. Collaborations on the other hand are often linked to discussion of channels (publications, conferences, teaching and pedagogy, joint research, knowledge networks and civic engagement), and recently community engagement and engaged research. The concern is that channels and not the interaction forms of university-industry relationships are discussed. Also, occasions where interactions are (transactional and relational) discussed, both are discussed through a transfer lens. Accordingly, the paper synthesizes relevant literature to propose a framework for understanding the different interaction forms of university with industry/society. As a result, it unveils the peculiarities and tensions present in interaction forms. Therefore, by distilling existing literature, it puts forward a framework to examine the different interaction forms and address the question: What are the dynamics of the interaction forms for organizing across university and industry? The contribution to knowledge management is that exploring the interaction forms provides an understanding of transfer and collaboration. Such understanding is useful to university policy makers, research funding agencies and researchers. It is also useful to practitioners who want to engage with and utilise university expertise. This paper concludes by arguing that exploring the different forms of interaction ultimately provides understanding of engaged research. The frameworks which accepts the tension equips universities and policy makers on organizing across boundaries

Understanding Interaction Through the Lens of Materiality and the Processual Nature of Artifacts

The elements and processes to understand organisational business-to-business interactions have been extensively explored. The context and forms these interactions takeunderpinmajor threads of research in the Markets-as-Networks tradition of understanding business networks. Standard operating procedures (SOPs), job specs, contracts andbriefs as physical objects play material roles within these business-to-business interactions, guiding and managing how these relationships play out. This paper primarily builds on the rich Markets-as-Networks tradition by refocusing attention on the role artifacts play in the interaction process. In addition there appears to be non-material artifacts, without physical forms, that also aid in guiding and managing interactions. This paper incorporates the construct of materiality into considering non-material artifacts,broadening the scope of our analysis and allowing us to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the role various artifacts play in business-to-business interactions. Two cases considering inter-organisational routines through the lens of an artifactual unit of analysis are outlined.These two cases raise issues of focus in relation to the context of interaction core to the Markets-as-Networks tradition. As a consequence this paper takes a closer look at: the processual characteristics within long term, close and complex relationships; the roles that artifacts play in these interactions represented by organisational and inter-organisational routines; how the artifactual characteristics in themselves either aid, alter or hinder the context of interaction.By drawing distinctions,relating to the materiality of artifacts, we illustrate how mangers’ understanding of the role artifacts, and unseen artifacts can play in impacting on guiding and managing business-to-business relationships. The conclusion of this paper discusses the managerial relevance of the processual characteristics of artifacts and their form of materiality. By comparing and contrasting two inter-organisational cases through the lens of materiality and the processual characteristics embodied in artifacts managers can gain a better understanding how various artifacts can guide and manage processes of interaction

The performativity of sustainability: making a conduit a marketing device

This paper examines how a conduit, as a ‘working infrastructure’ with material and social qualities, shapes and connects the business and practices of sustainable waste management. Conduits have had a prominent but passive role in explanations of food leftovers within households. We show that a conduit, as an assemblage of investments and practices among interested actors, requires and allows for the further economisation and calculation of waste management. Conduits shape business-to-business exchanges and relationships, deriving demand across domains of exchange and managing risks to the continuation of industrial processes. They resist singular stewardship, instead allowing multiple actors to recognise their interdependence and contest the development of facilities and services. Marketing communications form an important dimension of the conduit, albeit distributed across different parts of the conduit, in aligning actors’ practices of sorting and ‘moving things along’ at and between locations