The Paradox of Knowledge Creation in a High-Reliability Organization: A Case Study

Abstract

We employed an instrumental case study of a multisystem hydroelectric power producer, a high-reliability organization (HRO), to explore how new knowledge is created in a context in which errors may result in destruction, catastrophic consequences, and even loss of human life. The findings indicate that knowledge creation is multilevel, nested within three levels of paradox: paradox of knowing, paradox of practice, and paradox of organizing. The combination of the lack of opportunity for errors with the dynamism of the HRO context necessitates that individuals work through multiple paradoxes to generate and formalize new knowledge. The findings contribute to the literature on knowledge creation in context by explicating the work practices associated with issue recognition, resolution, and refinement, and the formalization of knowledge in failure-intolerant organizations.

High Reliability Organization (HRO) systematic literature review: Discovery of culture as a foundational hallmark

“…Many common theories were applied (e.g., resilience theory, communication theory, leadership theory, risk theory, organization theory, organization design theory, systems theory, decision theory, complexity theory, control theory, expectancy theory and redundancy theory), all of which appeared multiple times throughout the literature as explanatory support for various aspects of the HRO. In addition, some novel theories or models were also occasionally applied such as paradox theory (Milosevic, Bass, & Combs, 2015; Saunders et al., 2016), and Thorngate's impostulate of theoretical simplicity (Vidal, 2015).…”

Exploring the Embeddedness of an Informal Community of Practice Within a Formal Organizational Context: A Case Study in the German Military

“…As it is often the case with qualitative research, scholars must omit interesting avenues in the effort to focus their study appropriately (Milosevic, Bass, & Combs, 2018). Likewise, our data gave rise to several issues that could be worth studying in more detail.…”

Sensemaking, Organizing, and Surpassing: A Handoff*

“…For example, past experience could be treated as a reliable guide in the process of enactment, but questioned in the selection process when the 'familiar' enactment is interpreted. This duality of belief and doubt is preserved by Milosevic et al (2018) in their study of a multisystem hydroelectric power producer. They discuss a recurring pattern where individuals face unexpected events that require timely action but where the wrong response may have grave consequences.…”