Governing Knowledge Creation: A Problem‐Finding and Problem‐Solving Perspective

Heiman, Bruce; Nickerson, Jack A.; Zenger, Todd

doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199235926.003.0002

Cited by 14 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We address communication-based antecedents of whether community members launch new projects (set up new problems) or join existing projects (solve subproblems defined by others or define subproblems within an overall problem structure defined by others), framing our discussion in terms of the "problem-solving perspective" (e.g., Baer, Dirks, and Nickerson, 2013;Heiman, Nickerson, and Zenger, 2009;Macher, 2006;Macher and Boerner, 2012;Nickerson and Zenger, 2004). We specifically argue that an individual's project-behavior (i.e., launching or joining) is predicted by the mode of communication (Guetzkow and Simon, 1955;Orlikowski and Yates, 1994;Zmud, Lind, and Young, 1990) and the associated artifacts (or absence thereof) that characterize the context of interaction around the focal individual.…”

Section: Managerial Summarymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our findings hold implications for understanding how management may influence project behaviors and problem-solving: Firms that need to concentrate on more incremental problem-solving efforts (e.g., because a sufficient number of attractive problems have already been defined) should create environments in which interaction is undertaken mainly via artifacts. On the other hand, if firms seek to generate new problems (e.g., new strategic opportunities), they should create environments in which open-ended, verbal conversation is relatively more important than artifact-based communication.We address communication-based antecedents of whether community members launch new projects (set up new problems) or join existing projects (solve subproblems defined by others or define subproblems within an overall problem structure defined by others), framing our discussion in terms of the "problem-solving perspective" (e.g., Baer, Dirks, and Nickerson, 2013;Heiman, Nickerson, and Zenger, 2009;Macher, 2006;Macher and Boerner, 2012;Nickerson and Zenger, 2004). We specifically argue that an individual's project-behavior (i.e., launching or joining) is predicted by the mode of communication (Guetzkow and Simon, 1955;Orlikowski and Yates, 1994;Zmud, Lind, and Young, 1990) and the associated artifacts (or absence thereof) that characterize the context of interaction around the focal individual.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Problem‐formulation and problem‐solving in self‐organized communities: How modes of communication shape project behaviors in the free open‐source software community

Foss

Frederiksen

Rullani

2015

Strategic Management Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research summary: Building on the problem‐solving perspective, we study behaviors related to projects and the communication‐based antecedents of such behaviors in the free open‐source software (FOSS) community. We examine two kinds of problem/project‐behaviors: Individuals can set up projects around the formulation of new problems or join existing projects and define and/or work on subproblems within an existing problem. The choice between these two behaviors is influenced by the mode of communication. A communication mode with little a priori structure is the best mode for communicating about new problems (i.e., formulating a problem); empirically, it is associated with project launching behaviors. In contrast, more structured communication fits subproblems better and is related to project joining behaviors. Our hypotheses derive support from data from the FOSS community. Managerial summary: We study how the way in which individuals communicate influence the project‐behaviors they engage in. We find that relatively unstructured communication is associated with the setting up new projects, while communication that is structured around an artifact is associated with joining projects. Our findings hold implications for understanding how management may influence project behaviors and problem‐solving: Firms that need to concentrate on more incremental problem‐solving efforts (e.g., because a sufficient number of attractive problems have already been defined) should create environments in which interaction is undertaken mainly via artifacts. On the other hand, if firms seek to generate new problems (e.g., new strategic opportunities), they should create environments in which open‐ended, verbal conversation is relatively more important than artifact‐based communication. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Section: Managerial Summarymentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Problem‐formulation and problem‐solving in self‐organized communities: How modes of communication shape project behaviors in the free open‐source software community

Foss

Frederiksen

Rullani

2015

Strategic Management Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Third, we advance the problem-solving perspective in strategy (Foss et al, 2015;Heiman et al, 2009;Nickerson et al, 2007Nickerson et al, , 2012, specifically within the MNC context (Tippmann et al, 2012;Tippmann et al, 2017), with respect to some important individual actions. Thus far, individual activities and behaviors, especially in relation to integrating diverse knowledge, have been recognized as central to the creation of high-value solutions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From the problem‐solving perspective, firms such as multinational corporations (MNCs) gain competitive advantage if they develop valuable solutions to complex organizational problems (Heiman, Nickerson, & Zenger, ; Nickerson, Silverman, & Zenger, ; Nickerson, Yen, & Mahoney, ). To create valuable solutions, diverse knowledge needs to be synthesized in unique ways.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accessing diverse knowledge for problem solving in the MNC: A network mobilization perspective

Parker

Tippmann

Kratochvil

2018

Global Strategy Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research Summary: The fundamental challenge of problem solving is synthesizing diverse knowledge for solution development. This article addresses the trade‐off between knowledge diversity, that is, approaching the most relevant individual to maximize the likelihood that he/she possesses diverse knowledge and the ability to access, that is, recognize and assimilate this knowledge. We examine this trade‐off in relation to managers in subsidiaries of multinational corporations (MNCs) and two types of diverse knowledge—novel knowledge and specialist expertise. We use a network mobilization perspective and arguments on network range within and across organizational boundaries, testing our hypotheses on a dataset of 838 ties from 120 managers leading problem‐solving projects. Our study offers implications for the knowledge‐based view of the MNC as well as the problem‐solving perspective in strategy. Managerial Summary: We examine where managers in subsidiaries of multinational corporations (MNCs) access diverse knowledge to solve nonroutine problems. This is underpinned by a trade‐off. To increase chances that the other person holds diverse knowledge, they may reach far in terms of approaching an individual in a different work context; but such far reach diminishes their ability to integrate this knowledge. We resolve this trade‐off. We find that approaching individuals from an MNC unit in another country location but from the same function increases the likelihood of accessing novel knowledge; whereas accessing specialist expertise is more likely achieved by approaching an MNC colleague from another function located in another country and someone working for an external organization. Overall, we provide insights for problem solvers in organizations.

show abstract

“…One case showed that mechanisms to enhance knowledge sharing based on a concept of transactions can actually increase individuals' hostility towards knowledge sharing, while those based on commitment were more successful [44]. Another [45] highlighted how knowledge governance can help firms organise to identify 'valuable' problems and search efficiently for their solutions. They argued that complex, illstructured problems require very different governance arrangements than comparatively simple problems, where authority-based hierarchies become less efficient at finding solutions, the more complex the problems become.…”

Section: Private Sector Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge Governance for Sustainable Development: A Review

Kerkhoff

2014

CiS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainable development is a knowledge intensive process, but plagued by persistent concerns over our apparent inability to connect what we know with more sustainable practices and outcomes. While considerable attention has been given to ways we may better understand and enhance the knowledge-based processes that support the governance of social-ecological systems, relatively few have examined the governance of knowledge itself. The institutions-rules and norms-that govern knowledge may shed light on the persistence of 'gaps' between knowledge and action. In this review I seek to answer the question: can interdisciplinary knowledge governance literature contribute to understanding and analysing the institutional knowledge-based dimensions of sustainable development? I present and analyse the concept of knowledge governance as it is emerging in a range of disciplines and practice areas, including private sector management literature and public regulation theory and practice. I then integrate the findings from this review into a model of sustainable development proposed by Nilsson et al. [1]. I show that knowledge governance (as a scale above knowledge management) can inform Nilsson et al.'s three "nested" dimensions of sustainability: human wellbeing (through access to knowledge and freedom to exercise informed choice); resourcebase management (though enhancing regulation and innovation and transitions from exclusive to inclusive knowledge systems); and global public goods (by balancing public and private interests and fostering global innovation systems). This review concludes by presenting a framework that places sustainable development in the context of broader socio-political struggles towards more open, inclusive knowledge systems.

show abstract

Governing Knowledge Creation: A Problem‐Finding and Problem‐Solving Perspective

Cited by 14 publications

References 0 publications

Problem‐formulation and problem‐solving in self‐organized communities: How modes of communication shape project behaviors in the free open‐source software community

Problem‐formulation and problem‐solving in self‐organized communities: How modes of communication shape project behaviors in the free open‐source software community

Accessing diverse knowledge for problem solving in the MNC: A network mobilization perspective

Knowledge Governance for Sustainable Development: A Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About