Knowledge Sharing is Knowledge Creation: An Intervention Study of Metaphors for Knowledge
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/jookc.v2i1.22354Keywords:
Knowledge sharing, metaphors, epistemic action, knowledge creationAbstract
Knowledge sharing and knowledge transfer are important to knowledge communication. However when groups of knowledge workers engage in knowledge communication activities, it easily turns into mere mechanical information processing despite other ambitions.
This article relates literature of knowledge communication and knowledge creation to an intervention study in a large Danish food production company. For some time a specific group of employees uttered a wish for knowledge sharing, but it never really happened. The group was observed and submitted to metaphor analysis as well as analysis of co-creation strategies. Confronted with the results, the group completely altered their approach to knowledge sharing and let it become knowledge co-creation.
The conclusions are, that knowledge is and can only be a diverse and differentiated concept, and that groups are able to embrace this complexity. Thus rather than reducing complexity and dividing knowledge into to dichotomies or hierarchies, knowledge workers should be enabled to use different strategies for knowledge sharing, -transfer and –creation depending on the task and the nature of the knowledge. However if the ambition is to have a strategy for sharing personal or tacit knowledge, the recommended approach is to co-create new knowledge by use of joint epistemic action.
References
Andriessen, D. (2006). On the metaphorical nature of intellectual capital: a textual analysis. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 7(1), 93–110. http://doi.org/10.1108/14691930610639796 Andriessen, D. (2008). Stuff or love? How metaphors direct our efforts to manage knowledge in organisations. Knowl Manage Res Prac, 6(1), 5–12. Bjørndahl, J. S., Fusaroli, R., Østergaard, S., & Tylén, K. (2014). Thinking together with material representations: Joint epistemic actions in creative problem solving. Cognitive Semiotics, 7(1), 103–123. http://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem-2014-0006 Cameron, L., Maslen, R., Todd, Z., Maule, J., Stratton, P., & Stanley, N. (2009). The Discourse Dynamics Approach to Metaphor and Metaphor-Led Discourse Analysis. Metaphor and Symbol, 24(2), 63–89. http://doi.org/10.1080/10926480902830821 Clark, A., & Chalmers, D. (1998). The Extended Mind. Analysis, 58(1), 7–19. http://doi.org/10.1093/analys/58.1.7 Davenport, T. H., & Prusak, L. (1998). Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage what They Know. Harvard Business Press. Greve, L. (in review). Metaphor as a management tool. In Routledge Handbook of Metaphor and Language. Routledge. Greve, L. (2015a). Co-creation of Metaphors by use of Multimodality Shared Modes Reinforce Common Metaphorical Schemata. Metaphor and the Social World. Greve, L. (2015b). The Diversity of Metaphors for Knowledge: An Empirical Study. Journal of Knowledge Management Research and Practice. Heracleous, L., & Jacobs, C. D. (2008). Crafting Strategy: The Role of Embodied Metaphors. Long Range Planning, 41(3), 309–325. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2008.02.011 Jacobs, C. D., & Heracleous, L. T. (2006). Constructing Shared Understanding The Role of Embodied Metaphors in Organization Development. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42(2), 207–226. http://doi.org/10.1177/0021886305284895 Jensen, T. W., & Cuffari, E. (2014). Doubleness in Experience: Toward a Distributed Enactive Approach to Metaphoricity. Metaphor and Symbol, 29(4), 278–297. http://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2014.948798 Johnson, M. (2013). The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason. University of Chicago Press. Kastberg, P. (2014). Organizational Knowledge Communication – a Nascent 3rd Order Disciplinarity. Journal of Organizational Knowledge Communication, 1(1), 83–97. Krennmayr, T. (2013). Top-down versus bottom-up approaches to the identification of metaphor in discourse. Metaphorik.de, (24), 7–36. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The Univ. of Chicago Press. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: the embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. Basic Books. Retrieved from http://www.google.dk/books?id=KbqxnX3_uc0C Lyotard, J.-F. (1996). Viden og det postmoderne samfund. Slagmark. Menary, R. (2010). Introduction to the special issue on 4E cognition. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 9(4), 459–463. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-010-9187-6 Nonaka, I. (1994). A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14–37. Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company : how japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press. Nonaka, I., & von Krogh, G. (2009). Perspective—Tacit Knowledge and Knowledge Conversion: Controversy and Advancement in Organizational Knowledge Creation Theory. Organization Science, 20(3), 635–652. http://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1080.0412 Pragglejaz Group. (2007). MIP: A Method for Identifying Metaphorically Used Words in Discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 1–39. http://doi.org/10.1080/10926480709336752 Qvortrup, L. (2006). Knowledge, Education and Learning. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur. Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2001). Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice. SAGE. Rowley, J. (2007). The wisdom hierarchy: representations of the DIKW hierarchy. Journal of Information Science, 33(2), 163–180. http://doi.org/10.1177/0165551506070706 Silverman, D. (2013). Doing Qualitative Research: A Practical Handbook. SAGE. Steen, G. (2010). A method for linguistic metaphor identification : from MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Pub. Company. Steen, G. (2011). The language of knowledge management: A linguistic approach to metaphor analysis. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 28(2), 181–188. http://doi.org/10.1002/sres.1087 Varela, F. J., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1991). The embodied mind : cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
§1. Object of the agreement and rights
The author guarantees that she/he has the copyright to the work and that this specific publishing does not offend other persons’, organizations’ or companies’ copyright.
- 1.1. The author gives the Journal of Organizational Knowledge Communication a non-exclusive right to publish the work in the electronic version of the non-commercial journal The Journal of Organizational Knowledge Communication. This journal is an open access journal and will be available for free on the internet and as thus available for all internet users worldwide. The work will be published in English.
- 1.2. The journal is published under a Creative Commons license Attribution Non-commercial No derivatives (cc by-nc-sa) http://creativecommons.org/about/license/. This license allows others to download your work and share it with others as long as they mention you and link back to you, but they can’t change it in any way or use it commercially.
- 1.3. The author is the copyright holder and the author agrees to the above mentioned Creative Commons license.
- 1.4. The Journal of Organizational Knowledge Communication is not entitled to transfer the obtained right in this agreement to a third party.
§2. Publishing on the Internet
The Journal of Organizational Knowledge Communication is under an obligation to publish the work within a reasonable time span and within the first year after the manuscript has been accepted for publication. The Journal of Organizational Knowledge Communication is entitled to use the work or parts of the work for marketing purposes.
§3. Proofreading
The Journal of Organizational Knowledge Communication is edited, peer reviewed and proofread by the editors and the international peer review board in collaboration with the author.
§4. Availability on the Internet
The article will be published on the Internet at www.jookc.com.
