Scholars of the theory of the firm have begun to emphasize the sources and conditions of what has been described as “the organizational advantage,” rather than focus on the causes and consequences of market failure. Typically, researchers see such organizational advantage as accruing from the particular capabilities organizations have for creating and sharing knowledge. In this article we seek to contribute to this body of work by developing the following arguments: (1) social capital facilitates the creation of new intellectual capital; (2) organizations, as institutional settings, are conducive to the development of high levels of social capital; and (3) it is because of their more dense social capital that firms, within certain limits, have an advantage over markets in creating and sharing intellectual capital. We present a model that incorporates this overall argument in the form of a series of hypothesized relationships between different dimensions of social capital and the main mechanisms and proces...

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/259373.pdf

Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage

Two paradigms characterize much of the research in the Information Systems discipline: behavioral science and design science The behavioral-science paradigm seeks to develop and verify theories that explain or predict human or organizational behavior The design-science paradigm seeks to extend the boundaries of human and organizational capabilities by creating new and innovative artifacts Both paradigms are foundational to the IS discipline, positioned as it is at the confluence of people, organizations, and technology Our objective is to describe the performance of design-science research in Information Systems via a concise conceptual framework and clear guidelines for understanding, executing, and evaluating the research In the design-science paradigm, knowledge and understanding of a problem domain and its solution are achieved in the building and application of the designed artifact Three recent exemplars in the research literature are used to demonstrate the application of these guidelines We conclude with an analysis of the challenges of performing high-quality design-science research in the context of the broader IS community

/pdf/design-science-in-information-systems-research-1f7l0yvs8e.pdf

Design science in information systems research

Knowledge is a broad and abstract notion that has defined epistemological debate in western philosophy since the classical Greek era. In the past few years, however, there has been a growing interest in treating knowledge as a significant organizational resource. Consistent with the interest in organizational knowledge and knowledge management (KM), IS researchers have begun promoting a class of information systems, referred to as knowledge management systems (KMS). The objective of KMS is to support creation, transfer, and application of knowledge in organizations. Knowledge and knowledge management are complex and multi-faceted concepts. Thus, effective development and implementation of KMS requires a foundation in several rich literatures.

/pdf/review-knowledge-management-and-knowledge-management-systems-1mpbigqrg8.pdf

Review: Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: conceptual foundations and research issues

Recent ethnographic studies of workplace practices indicate that the ways people actually work usually differ fundamentally from the ways organizations describe that work in manuals, training programs, organizational charts, and job descriptions. Nevertheless, organizations tend to rely on the latter in their attempts to understand and improve work practice. We examine one such study. We then relate its conclusions to compatible investigations of learning and of innovation to argue that conventional descriptions of jobs mask not only the ways people work, but also significant learning and innovation generated in the informal communities-of-practice in which they work. By reassessing work, learning, and innovation in the context of actual communities and actual practices, we suggest that the connections between these three become apparent. With a unified view of working, learning, and innovating, it should be possible to reconceive of and redesign organizations to improve all three.

/pdf/organizational-learning-and-communities-of-practice-toward-a-5d5ay5q3oh.pdf

Organizational Learning and Communities-of-Practice: Toward a Unified View of Working, Learning, and Innovation

This paper differs from previous examinations of organizational learning in that it is broader in scope and more evaluative of the literatures. Four constructs related to organizational learning knowledge acquisition, information distribution, information interpretation, and organizational memory are articulated, and the literatures related to each are described and critiqued.

The literature on knowledge acquisition is voluminous and multi-faceted, and so the knowledge acquisition construct is portrayed here as consisting of five subconstructs or subprocesses: 1 drawing on knowledge available at the organization's birth, 2 learning from experience, 3 learning by observing other organizations, 4 grafting on to itself components that possess knowledge needed but not possessed by the organization, and 5 noticing or searching for information about the organization's environment and performance. Examination of the related literatures indicates that much has been learned about learning from experience, but also that there is a lack of cumulative work and a lack of integration of work from different research groups. Similarly, much has been learned about organizational search, but there is a lack of conceptual work, and there is a lack of both cumulative work and syntheses with which to create a more mature literature. Congenital learning, vicarious learning, and grafting are information acquisition subprocesses about which relatively little has been learned.

The literature concerning information distribution is rich and mature, but an aspect of information distribution that is central to an organization's benefitting from its learning, namely how units that possess information and units that need this information can find each other quickly and with a high likelihood, is unexplored. Information interpretation, as an organizational process, rather than an individual process, requires empirical work for further advancement. Organizational memory is much in need of systematic investigation, particularly by those whose special concerns are improving organizational learning and decision making.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/2634941.pdf

Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures

The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action

«... Intervenir es entrar en un conjunto de relaciones en desarrollo con el proposito de ser util. El tipo de ayuda en el que nos vamos a centrar consiste en aumentar la capacidad para una buena dialectica organizativa —es decir, la capacidad de indagacion organizativa para encajar errores, incongruencias e incompatibilidades en una teoria organizativa de la accion la cual necesariamente emerge a medida que el sistema organizativo/ambiental cambia» (p. 158). «... Nuestra actividad en la intervencion debe por tanto ocuparse de tres propositos. Estos son: 1) ayudar al cliente a ser consciente y a descongelar sus teorias al uso del Modelo I y sistemas de aprendizaje O-I, y 2) educar al cliente a usar el Modelo II y a crear sistemas de aprendizaje O-II, para 3) usar este nuevo conocimiento con el fin de lograr una buena dialectica organizativa. Llamamos a la actividad de intervencion que incluye las tres intenciones una intervencion extensa» (p. 166).

/pdf/organizational-learning-a-theory-of-action-perspective-pljzqr6cp1.pdf

Organizational Learning: A Theory Of Action Perspective

My Personal Review: The problems that face professionals (physicians, lawyers, architects) are rarely straightforward and clear. They are complex and lack "right answers." Skillful professional practice often depends less on factual knowledge than on the ability to reflect before taking action. Yet most professional schools only teach theory and how to apply it to straightforward problems. Frankly, future professionals are being poorly equipped for the real world.

Educating the Reflective Practitioner: Toward a New Design for Teaching and Learning in the Professions

Contents: Professional Knowledge and Reflection-in-Action: The crisis of confidence in professional knowledge From technical rationality to reflection-in-action. Professional Contexts for Reflection-in-Action: Design as a reflective conversation with the situation Psychotherapy: The patient as a universe of one The structure of reflection-in-action Reflective practice in the science-based professions Town planning: Limits to reflection-in-action The art of managing: Reflection-in-action within an organizational learning system Patterns and limits of reflection-in-action across the professions. Conclusion: Implications for the professions and their place in society.

The reflective practitioner : how professionals think in action

Perface. One: Theory. 1. Theories of Action. 2. Evaluating Theories of Action. Two: Action. 3. Diagnosing Theories-in-Use. 4. Model I. 5. Model II. 6. Transition from Model I to Model II. 7. Learining Model-II Behavior. Three: Practice. 8. Issues in Professional Education. 9. Implications for Professional Competence and Practice. 10. Redesigning Professional Education. NotesReferencesIndex.

Donald A. Schön

Papers

The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action

Organizational Learning: A Theory Of Action Perspective

Educating the Reflective Practitioner: Toward a New Design for Teaching and Learning in the Professions

The reflective practitioner : how professionals think in action

Theory in Practice: Increasing Professional Effectiveness