Experiencing collaborative knowledge creation processes

Jakubik, Maria

doi:10.1108/09696470810842475

Cited by 50 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, it helps the faculty members to understand the importance of interaction, increases motivation and encourages collective learning in the process of knowledge creation (Jakubik 2008).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contextual-Based Knowledge Creation for Agroindustrial Innovation

Anggraeni

Machfud

Maarif

et al. 2017

GADJAH MADA INT. J. BUS.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses the knowledge creation process in one department, in a higher educational context, and the possible actions to take to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the knowledge creation system in it. We conducted a case study at one department of a university that strives to improve its innovations, in terms of their quantity and quality.We used a soft system methodology to investigate the knowledge creation system in the chosen department. From the study, we conclude that the department can be considered as a learning organization, within which its staff continually create, acquire and transfer knowledge. This department has a learning environment which is conducive, concrete learning processes, and leadership that reinforces learning. In the context of producing agroindustry innovations, the knowledge creation system in this department is considered to be less effective since it frequently happens more at individual or small group levels. To improve its effectiveness, the management may facilitate the institutionalization of knowledge creation processes at every phase of the interactions between tacit and explicit knowledge.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contextual-Based Knowledge Creation for Agroindustrial Innovation

Anggraeni

Machfud

Maarif

et al. 2017

GADJAH MADA INT. J. BUS.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…"The focus on human is not enough", mentioned Jakubik (2008), not only does the focus need to be at a micro-level, the scope should be contextual. Wenger & Snyder (2000) state ".…”

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Knowledge Management IT Tool: An Investigation within a Marketing Introductory Course

Ly¹,

Saadé²

2017

InSITE Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim/PurposeThe purpose of this study is to shed light on how students learn within an environment tailored to knowledge creation. BackgroundWe build on Nonaka, Toyama, and Konno's three key elements: SECI model, Ba, Leadership as well as current knowledge management researchers critiques and improvements. MethodologyBased on an introductory marketing course, we used an in-house web based learning tool (peer-to peer) to capture score performances and perception surveys. The analysis was conducted through an exploratory factor analysis (EFA). ContributionThis study shed light on current knowledge management critiques by providing measures at the micro-level and community level. FindingsPerceptions of adaptability and usefulness change positively over time, while students' repeated practice prepares them for different styles of questions as their performances increases over time. Recommendations for PractitionersOrganizations can understand how employees create knowledge through exchange of ideas, feedback, and common goals. Supervisor can understand their employees better and employees can gain a sense of control on their work. Recommendation for ResearchersThe ability to capture information over time on the human and community level within a system allows further research to shed light on different variables of knowledge creation in the field. Impact on Society An appreciation of the mechanism of knowledge creation can encourage organization to become more innovative and focus on people rather than material.A Knowledge Management IT Tool 172Future Research Measures such as the engagement level, the personality level, and compatibility level within a community to create knowledge are to be explored.

show abstract

“…Some of these correspond to particular circumstances of time and place (Hayek, 1945), knowledge linked to information (Arrow, 1973;Williamson, 1985), specific knowledge Jensen, 1983a, 1983b), tacit and explicit knowledge (Polanyi, 1962;Nonaka, 1991), analysable or non-analysable knowledge (Perrow, 1967(Perrow, , 1970, human capital (Becker, 1993), organisational routines (Nelson and Winter, 1982), core competences (Prahalad and Hamel, 1990), and knowledge linked to the organisational context and to practice (Weick and Roberts, 1993;Tsoukas, 1994Tsoukas, , 1996Tsoukas, , 2009Spender, 1996aSpender, , 1996bSpender, , 2007Spender, , 2008Jakubik, 2008;Bratianu andOrzea, 2010, Akehurst et al, 2011).…”

Section: Conceptual Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Key levels for knowledge creation and management: which is the ontological locus for learning in Spanish manufacturing firms?

Vivas-López

2013

IJLIC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aims to highlight two core issues related to knowledge management and organisational learning. First deals with the ontological support-knowledge creation relationship. Secondly, the comparison between Crossan et al. (1999) and Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) models: on what ontological supports knowledge is created? Individuals, groups and organisation: are they independent or do they interact with each other? Is individual level swallowed up by the group [as Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) seems to suggest], leading to groups and organisation as unique ontological levels? The empirical study draws those ontological levels in large manufacturing Spanish firms. It identifies (via exploratory factor analysis) the ontological supports of knowledge going on to apply a confirmatory factor analysis that shows the fit of the factors obtained from the sample. Finally, our research also identifies that individual-group ontological support of knowledge is significant, along with organisational (and institutional) ontological support of knowledge.

show abstract

Experiencing collaborative knowledge creation processes

Cited by 50 publications

References 29 publications

Contextual-Based Knowledge Creation for Agroindustrial Innovation

Contextual-Based Knowledge Creation for Agroindustrial Innovation

A Knowledge Management IT Tool: An Investigation within a Marketing Introductory Course

Key levels for knowledge creation and management: which is the ontological locus for learning in Spanish manufacturing firms?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About