Journal of the Operational Research Society

, Volume 54, Issue 9, pp 914–923 | Cite as

Belief revision and organisational knowledge dynamics

Special Article
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Part Special Issue: Modelling Organizational Knowledge

Abstract

It is widely accepted nowadays that the ability of a firm to display sustained competitive advantage, relies heavily on its efficiency in managing organisational knowledge, and keeping it up-to-date with internal and external developments. It is therefore imperative to develop a deeper understanding of organisational knowledge evolution. In this paper, we propose the use of methods and techniques from the area of Belief Revision in studying organisational knowledge dynamics. Belief Revision lies at the intersection of Formal Philosophy and Computer Science, and studies the process by which a rational agent changes her beliefs in the light of new information. The formal models that have been developed in this area are intuitive and elegant, and in this paper we show how they can be imported into the context of organisational knowledge management.

Keywords

organisational studies management dynamic capabilities artificial intelligence 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Haridimos Tsoukas, Nicos Mylonopoulos and the anonymous referees for their detailed and very useful comments.

References

  1. Cool KO and Schendel D (1987). Strategic group formation and performance: the Case of the U.S. Pharmaceutical Industry. 1963–1982. Mngt Sci 33: 1102–1124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barney JB (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J Mngt 17: 99–120.Google Scholar
  3. Wernerfelt B (1984). A resource–based view of the firm. Strat Mngt J 5: 171–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dierickx I and Cool K (1989). Asset stock accumulation & sustainability of competitive advantage. Mngt Sci 35: 1504–1511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Teece DJ (2000). Strategies for managing knowledge assets: the role of firm structure and industrial context. Long Range Plan 33: 35–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Teece DJ, Pisano G and Schuen A (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strat Mngt J 18: 509–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Nonaka I, Toyama R and Nagata A (2000). A firm as a knowledge–creating entity: a new perspective on the theory of the firm. Indust Corporate Change 9: 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Alchourron C, Gardenfors P and Makinson D (1985). On the logic of theory change: partial meet contraction and revision. J Symbolic Logic 50(2): 510–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bohn RE (1994). Measuring and managing technological knowledge. Sloan Mngt Rev Fall 36(1): 61–73.Google Scholar
  10. Nonaka I and Keuchi H (1995). The Knowledge Creating Company. Oxford University Press: Oxford.Google Scholar
  11. Nonaka I, Toyama R and Komo N (2000). SECI, Ba and Leadership: a unified model of dynamic knowledge creation. Long Range Plann 33: 5–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ancori B, Bureth A and Cohenbet P (2000). The economics of knowledge: the debate about codification and tacit knowledge. Indust Corporate Change 9: 255–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Argyris C and Schon D (1978). Organisational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective. Addison–Wesley: Philippines.Google Scholar
  14. Lipman SA and Rumelt RP (1982). Uncertain imitability: an analysis of inter-firm differences in efficiency under competition. Bell J Econom 13: 418–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cowan R and Foray D (1997). The economics of codification and the diffusion of knowledge. Indust Corporate Change 6: 595–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hakanson L (2001). Tacit knowledge, articulation and competitive advantage. LINK Conference. Copenhagen, 7–8 September.Google Scholar
  17. Prusak L (2001). Where did knowledge management come from. IBM Systems J 40: 1002–1007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Winter S (1987). Knowledge and competence as strategic assets. In: Teece DJ (ed). The Competitive Challenge: Strategies for Industrial Innovation and Renewal. Harper and Row, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  19. Zander U and Kogut B (1995). Knowledge and the speed of transfer and imitation of organisational capabilities. Org Sci 6: 76–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Szulanski G (1996). Exploring internal stickiness: impediments to the transfer of best practice within firm. Strat Mngt J 17: 27–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Argote L, Beckman SI and Epple D (1990). The persistence and transfer of learning in industrial setting. Mngt Sci 36: 140–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gardenfors P (1988). Knowledge in Flux. MIT Press: Cambridge.Google Scholar
  23. Gardenfors P and Makinson D (1988). Revisions of knowledge systems using epistemic entrenchment. In: Moshe YV (ed) Proceedings of the Second Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About Knowledge. Morgan Kaufmann: Pacific Grove, California, pp 89–95.Google Scholar
  24. Konieczny S and Perez P (1998). On the logic of merging. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR'98), Trento, Italy.Google Scholar
  25. Liberatore P and Schaerf M (1998). Arbitration. IEEE Trans Knowledge Data Eng 10(1): 76–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Darwiche A and Pearl J (1997). On the logic of iterated belief revision. Artif Intel 89(1–2): 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nayak A (1994). Iterated belief change based on epistemic entrenchment. Erkenntnis 41: 353–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan Ltd 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of PatrasPatrasGreece
  2. 2.AIT-Athens Information TechnologyGreece
  3. 3.University of TechnologyAustralia

Personalised recommendations