Knowledge Management Research & Practice

, Volume 13, Issue 3, pp 261–271 | Cite as

Coworking: assessing the role of proximity in knowledge exchange

Article

Abstract

This article contextualises the rising phenomenon of coworking in the theoretical framework of proximity and knowledge exchange. We present an empirical study through which we were able to assess if the physical co-presence of coworkers in these shared environments stimulates knowledge exchange among them. After identifying two different configurations of coworking spaces from the perspective of the forms of proximity that they involve, we designed a research project aimed at isolating geographical proximity and studying its role in facilitating the transmission of knowledge. The qualitative study of these two configurations of spaces underlined the importance of elements of organisational and social proximity in stimulating collaboration among coworkers and in promoting exchange of other forms of knowledge.

Keywords

coworking proximity organisational platform knowledge exchange knowledge flows 

References

  1. Amin A and Cohendet P (2004) Architectures of Knowledge: Firms, Capabilities, and Communities. Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amin A and Roberts J (2008) Community, Economic Creativity, and Organization. Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boschma R (2005) Proximity and innovation: a critical assessment. Regional Studies 39 (1), 61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown JS and Duguid P (1991) Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Organization Science 2 (1), 40–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brown JS and Duguid P (1998) Organizing knowledge. California Management Review 40 (3), 90–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Centre for Social Innovation. (2010) Proof: How Shared Spaces Are Changing the World. Centre for Social Innovation, Toronto.Google Scholar
  7. Chiesi AM (1999) L’analisi Dei Reticoli. FrancoAngeli, Milano.Google Scholar
  8. Cohen D and Prusak L (2001) In Good Company: How Social Capital Makes Organizations Work. Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  9. d’Ovidio M (2010) Network Locali Nell’economia Cognitiva-culturale. Il Caso Di Milano. Rassegna Italiana di Sociologia 51 (3), 459–484.Google Scholar
  10. Eliasson G (1990) The knowledge based information economy. In The Knowledge Based Information Economy (Eliasson G, Fölster S, Lindberg T, Pousette T and Taymaz E, Eds), pp 9–87, Almqvist and Wiksell International, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  11. Flyvbjerg B (2011) Case study. In The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (Denzin NK and Lincoln YS, Eds), pp 301–316, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.Google Scholar
  12. Foray D (2004) The Economics of Knowledge. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  13. Forlano L (2011) Building the open source city: changing work environments for collaboration and innovation. In From Social Butterfly to Engaged Citizen: Urban Informatics, Social Media, Ubiquitous Computing, and Mobile Technology to Support Citizen Engagement (Foth M, Forlano L, Satchell C and Gibbs M, Eds.), pp 437–460, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  14. Gertler MS (1995) ‘Being There’: proximity, organization, and culture in the development and adoption of advanced manufacturing technologies. Economic Geography 71 (1), 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gertler MS (2008) Buzz without being there? Communities of practice in context. In Community, Economic Creativity, and Organization (Amin A and Roberts J, Eds.), pp 203–226, Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gilly JP and Torre A (2000) Proximity relations: elements for an analytical framework. In Industrial Networks and Proximity (Green MB and McNaughton RB, Eds.), pp 1–17, Ashgate, Aldershot, UK.Google Scholar
  17. Huber F (2011) Do clusters really matter for innovation practices in information technology? questioning the significance of technological knowledge spillovers. Journal of Economic Geography 12 (1), 107–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ichijo K, von Krogh G and Nonaka I (1998) Knowledge enablers. In Knowing in Firms: Understanding, Managing and Measuring Knowledge (von Krogh G, Roos J and Kleine D, Eds), pp 173–203, Sage, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Johnson B, Lorenz E and Lundvall BÅ (2002) Why all this fuss about codified and tacit knowledge? Industrial and Corporate Change 11 (2), 245–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jones D, Sundsted T and Bacigalupo T (2009) I’m Outta Here! How Coworking Is Making the Office Obsolete. Not an MBA Press, Austin, TX.Google Scholar
  21. Lave J and Wenger E (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Leamer EE and Storper M (2001) The economic geography of the internet age. Journal of International Business Studies 32 (4), 641–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lorenzen M and Foss NJ (2002) Cognitive coordination, institutions, and clusters: an exploratory discussion. In Cooperation, Networks and Institutions in Regional Innovation Systems (Brenner T and Fornahl D, Eds.), pp 82–104, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.Google Scholar
  24. Lundvall BÅ (1988) Innovation as an interactive process: from user-producer interaction to the national system of innovation. In Technical Change and economic Theory (Dosi G, Freeman C, Nelson R, Silverberg G and Soete L, Eds.), pp 349–369, Pinter, London.Google Scholar
  25. Malone TW, Laubacher R and Dellarocas C (2009) Harnessing crowds: mapping the genome of collective intelligence. MIT Center for Collective Intelligence Working Paper 2009-001, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  26. Messeni Petruzzelli A, Albino V and Carbonara N (2009) External knowledge sources and proximity. Journal of Knowledge Management 13 (5), 301–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nonaka I and Konno N (1998) The concept of ‘Ba’: building a foundation for knowledge creation. California Management Review 40 (3), 40–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Porter ME (2000) Locations, clusters, and company strategy. In The Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography (Clark GL, Feldman MP and Gertler MS, Eds.), pp 253–274, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  29. Scott AJ (2008) Social Economy of the Metropolis: Cognitive-cultural Capitalism and the Global Resurgence of Cities. Oxford University Press, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Storper M and Venables AJ (2004) Buzz: face-to-face contact and the urban economy. Journal of Economic Geography 4 (4), 351–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Torre A (2010) Jalons pour une analyse dynamique des proximités. Revue d’Économie Régionale & Urbaine (3), 409–438.Google Scholar
  32. Townsend A, Forlano L and Simeti A (2011) Breakout! escape from the office: situating knowledge work in sentient public spaces. In Sentient City. Ubiquitous Computing, Architecture, and the Future of Urban Space (Shepard M, Ed.), The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  33. Wellman B (2007) Challenges in collecting personal network data: the nature of personal network analysis. Field Methods 19 (2), 111–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wenger E (1998) Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wenger E, MacDermott AR and Snyder WM (2002) Cultivating Communities of Practice. A Guide to Managing Knowledge. Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston, MA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Operational Research Society Ltd. 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of DesignPolitecnico di MilanoMilanItaly
  2. 2.Department of Sociology and Social ResearchUniversità degli Studi di Milano-BicoccaMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations