Gendering knowledge: the practices of knowledge management in the pharmaceutical industry

Abstract

Knowledge and knowledge management have become two of the latest buzzwords in the management literature. However, the literature presents primarily normative, undersocialized models of how knowledge could be administrated and developed as an organizational resource, and does not sufficiently recognize the social, political and emotional aspects of knowledge. In general, the knowledge of knowledge management is not situational. For instance, in what respect does the notion of knowledge take gender issues into account? This paper presents a study of clinical research activities in a major multinational pharmaceutical company and it suggests that the processes of knowing are always embedded in existing social and political, gendered assumptions and beliefs. Therefore, knowledge management need to be further developed to avoid general problematic positions.

Knowledge work: gender-blind or gender-biased?

“…Second, we have made a theoretical and empirical contribution to the field by bringing together the hitherto disconnected literatures relating to knowledge exchange and combination, IWB and gender. We have shown that the knowledge process itself is gendered (Styhre et al, 2001), and suggest that although women and men may exchange and combine knowledge to the same degree, women's segregation into lower-status and more routinised roles means that they are not able to translate this into innovative work behaviours, thus further depleting their career capital (Duberley and Cohen, 2010), and fostering a cycle of disadvantage for women in the knowledge economy. …”

“…In addition, within these sectors women tend to be crowded into low-status, low-skill and often non-permanent peripheral occupations with few developmental opportunities, and to earn substantially less than men (Cross, 2009;Glover and Guerrier, 2010;Jubas and Butterwick, 2008;Kelan, 2007;Reid, 1998;Tharenou, 2005;Walby, 2011), despite statistics showing they possess comparable or higher levels of education and qualification (Bolton and Muzio, 2008;Jubas and Butterwick, 2008;Styhre et al, 2001) and the existence of equal opportunities legislation (d'Mello, 2006;Fisher, 2010;Stanworth, 2000). However, it has been found that women are somewhat more likely to be found in the higher level occupational groupings within KIFs than within the economy as a whole (Turner and McMahon, 2008;Walby, 2011).…”

“…Whilst acknowledging its contested nature (Alvesson and Karreman, 2001), Benson and Brown (2007) argue that knowledge work has three core attributes: variety, the degree of reciprocal interdependence with other tasks, and autonomy. However, there have been very few prior quantitative studies comparing men's and women's participation in the production of knowledge, so we have little understanding of whether or how men and women differ in this regard (Lauring and Selmer, 2011;Styhre et al, 2001). The fact that qualitative studies have suggested women are clustered into subordinate work within KIFs would make it likely that more men than women undertake knowledge work in these settings.…”

“…Quantitative comparisons of women's and men's subjective experiences are scarce (cf Baldry et al, 2007). Even less is known about how men and women knowledge workers compare in terms of their participation in the core processes central to the activities of KIFs, such as knowledge exchange and combination and innovation (cf Lauring and Selmer, 2011), the successful accomplishment of which has been linked with career advancement (Styhre et al, 2001). In this paper, we address these gaps in knowledge by focusing on two main questions.…”

“…However, commentators concerned with understanding women's employment have criticised this body of work for being gender-neutral, or even gender-blind (Alvesson, 1998;Lauring and Selmer, 2011;Styhre et al, 2001). Some have pointed to the significant disadvantage experienced by women, for example, in terms of job role, career expectations, and salary (Guerrier et al, 2009;Moore et al, 2008), suggesting that KIFs, rather than creating the new opportunities for women heralded by the 'utopian' early literature (Toffler, 1981;Eaton, 1999;Walby, 2011), have instead simply redefined existing gender inequalities (Greco, 2005;Stanworth, 2000;Wajcman, 2004;Woodfield, 2002).…”