Advertisement

A Conceptual Perspective on Knowledge Management and Boundary Spanning: Knowledge, Boundaries and Commons

  • Léo Joubert
  • Claude Paraponaris
Chapter

Abstract

Boundaries and their transcendence have become a major discussion topic in fields involved in the creation of value in Western economies. Quite often assimilated with physical and cultural limits, boundaries are presented as obstacles to entrepreneurial achievement. An entrepreneurial ability that unfolds in different fields, the economy of course, but also cultural activities, notably through a revolution of usages facilitated with internet business platforms. It seems relevant to us to compare how commercial and non-commercial activities process information and accumulate knowledge.

Boundaries must be crossed in order to diffuse knowledge and create innovation. But boundaries also act as a protection for scientific, technical and cultural organisations and institutions. Boundaries are multiple and, in principle, objective between projects, organisations, types of knowledge, scientific disciplines and of course between the various actors. But are they really all that objective?

The succession of approaches towards knowledge management has a history (Snowden, J Knowl Manag 6(2):100–111, 2002). A genealogy of the concepts and their success is available, testifying to the plasticity of knowledge boundaries. In this sense, our analysis presents boundaries as a construct that enables associating as much as separating.

We begin by presenting a genealogy of the major concepts in the field of knowledge dissemination. We lay down the various terms that refer to knowledge boundaries, insisting, in particular, on the persistent misunderstanding about how the learning process leads to knowledge. This conceptual framework helps us distinguish two functions of a boundary—separation and elaboration. We will then go on to develop this distinction for commercial organisations, and thirdly for non-commercial organisations such as Wikipedia.

References

  1. Allen, T. J., Lee, D. M. S., & Tushman, M. L. (1979). Technology transfer as a function of position in the spectrum from research through development to technical services. Academy of Management Journal, 22(4), 694–708.Google Scholar
  2. Almeida, P. (1996). Knowledge sourcing by foreign multinationals: patent citation analysis in the U.S. semiconductor industry. Strategic Management Journal, 17(winter), 155–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amesse, F., & Cohendet, P. (2001). Technology transfer revisited from the perspective of the knowledge-based economy. Research Policy, 30(9), 1459–1478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Argote, L., & Ingram, P. (2000). Knowledge transfer: A basis for competitive advantage in firms. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82, 150–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe Halfway: quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Becker, M. C. (2001). Managing dispersed knowledge: Organizational problems, managerial strategies and their effectiveness. Journal of Management Studies, 38(7), 1037–1051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bender, S., & Fish, A. (2000). The transfer of knowledge and the retention of expertise: The continuing need for global assignments. Journal of Knowledge Management, 4(2), 125–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blumer, H. (1966). Sociological implications of the though of George Herbert Mead. American Journal of Sociology, 71(5), 535–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brassac, C. (1994). Speech acts and conversational sequencing. Pragmatics and Cognition, 2(1), 191–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brassac, C., Fixmer, P., Mondada, L., & Vinck, D. (2008). Interweaving objects, gestures, and talk in context. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 15(2), 208–233. Taylor & Francis (Routledge).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bresman, H., Birkinshaw, J., & Nobel, R. (1999). Knowledge transfer in international acquisitions. Journal of International Business Studies, 30(3), 439–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cabantous, L., & Gond, J. P. (2010). Rational decision making as performative praxis: Explaining rationality’s Éternel Retour. Organization Science, 22(3), 573–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carlile, P. R. (2002). A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: Boundary objects in new product development. Organization Science, 13(4), 442–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Charue-Duboc, F. (2006). A theoretical framework for understanding the organization of the R&D function. An empirical illustration from the chemical and pharmaceutical industry. International Journal of Innovation Management, 10(4), 455–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Charue-Duboc, F. (2007). Dynamiques des connaissances et dynamique d’innovation. Réalités Industrielles, mai, 32–37.Google Scholar
  16. Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cook, S. D. N., & Brown, J. S. (1999). Bridging epistemologies: The generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing. Organization Science, 10(4), 381–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Coriat, B. (Éd.). (2015). Le retour des communs et la crise de l’idéologie propriétaire. Paris: Les liens qui libèrent.Google Scholar
  19. Davenport, T. H., & Prusak, L. (1998). Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  20. Doz, Y. (1996). The evolution of cooperation in strategic alliances: Initial conditions or learning processes? Strategic Management Journal, 17(Special issue), 55–84.Google Scholar
  21. Forte, A., Larco, V., & Bruckman, A. (2009). Decentralization in Wikipedia governance. Journal of Management Information Systems, 26(1), 49–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Foucault, M. (1976). Histoire de la sexualité 1: La volonté de savoir. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  23. Giles, J. (2005). Internet encyclopaedias go head to head. Nature, (438).Google Scholar
  24. Grant, R. A. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter Special issue), 109–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gulati, R., Nohria, N., & Zaheer, A. (2000). Strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 203–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hedlund, G. (1994). A model of knowledge management and the N- form corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 15(special issue), 73–91.Google Scholar
  27. Hernes, T. (2004). Studying composite boundaries: A framework of analysis. Human Relations, 57, 9–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hettinger, E. C. (1989). Justifying intellectual property. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 18(1), 31–52.Google Scholar
  29. Holford, W. D. (2016). Boundary constructions as knowledge flows within and between work groups. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 14(1), 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Inkpen, A. C., & Tsang, E. W. K. (2005). Social capital, networks, and knowledge transfer. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 146–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Inkpen, A. C. (1996). Creating knowledge through collaboration. California Management Review, 39, 123–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lahiri, N. (2010). Geographic distribution of R&D activity: How does it affect innovation quality? Academy of Management Journal, 53(5), 1194–1209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Leuf, B., & Cunningham, W. (2001). The Wiki way: Quick collaboration on the web. Boston: Addison-Wesley Professional.Google Scholar
  34. McGuinness, D. L., Zeng, H., Da Silva, P. P., Ding, L., Narayanan, D., & Bhaowal, M. (2006). Investigations into trust for collaborative information repositories: A Wikipedia case study. MTW, 190.Google Scholar
  35. Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nonaka, I., & Konno, N. (1998). The concept of “Ba”: Building foundation for knowledge creation. California Management Review, 40(3), 40–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Nonaka, I., & Von Krogh, G. (2009). Tacit knowledge and knowledge conversion: Controversy and advancement in organizational knowledge creation theory. Organization Science, 20, 635–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Orlikowski, W. J. (2002). Knowing in practice: Enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing. Organization Science, 10, 249–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons. The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Piaget, J. (1974). La prise de conscience. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  42. Poitou, J. P. (1995). Documentation is knowledge: An anthropological approach to corporate knowledge management. In J. P. Barthès (Ed.), Proceedings of the third international symposium on the management of industrial and corporate knowledge (pp. 91–103). Compiègne.Google Scholar
  43. Poitou, J. P. (1997). La gestion collective des connaissances et la mémoire individuelle. In J. M. Fouet (Ed.), Connaissances et savoir-faire en entreprise. Intégration et capitalisation (pp. 157–178). Paris: Hermès.Google Scholar
  44. Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Reagle, J. M. (2010). Good faith collaboration: The culture of Wikipedia. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  46. Rey, A. (2007). Miroirs du monde: Une histoire de l’encyclopédisme. Paris: Fayard.Google Scholar
  47. Rogalski, J. (2004). Psychological analysis of complex work environments. In M. Fisher, N. Boreham, & B. Nyham (Eds.), European perspectives on learning at work: the acquisition of work process knowledge (pp. 218–236). Luxembourg: CEDEFOP 56.Google Scholar
  48. Schneider, S. C., & Angelmar, R. (1993). Cognition in organizational analysis: Who’s minding the store? Organization Studies, 14(3), 347–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Shinn, T. (1997). Crossing boundaries: The emergence of research-technology communities. In E. Henry & L. Loet (Eds.), Universities and the global knowledge economy: A triple helix of university-industry-government relations (pp. 85–96). London: Cassel Academic Press.Google Scholar
  50. Silva, F. N., Viana, M. P., Travençolo, B. A. N., & Costa, L. d. F. (2011). Investigating relationships within and between category networks in Wikipedia. Journal of Informetrics, 5(3), 431–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Simondon, G. (1989). L’individuation psychique et collective. Paris: Editions Aubier. First edition 1964.Google Scholar
  52. Simonin, B. L. (1999). Ambiguity and the process of knowledge transfer in strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 20(7), 595–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Snowden, D. (2002). Complex acts of knowing: Paradox and descriptive self-awareness. Journal of Knowledge Management, 6(2), 100–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, “translations” and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39. Social Studies of Science, 19(4), 387–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Suchman, L. (2006). Human-machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions (2nd ed.). Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Szulanski, G. (1996). Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Special Issue), 27–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Teece, D. J. (2009). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management: Organizing for innovation and growth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Tsoukas, H. (2009). The firm as a distributed knowledge system: A constructionist approach. In H. Tsoukas (Ed.), Complex knowledge. Studies in organizational epistemology (pp. 94–116). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Van Wijk, R., Jansen, J. J. P., & Lyles, M. A. (2008). Inter- and Intra-organizational knowledge Transfer: A meta-analytic review and assessment of its antecedents and consequences. Journal of Management Studies, 45(4), 830–853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Vergnaud, G. (1990). La théorie des champs conceptuels. Recherche en didactique des mathématiques, 10(2/3), 133–170.Google Scholar
  61. Vygotski, L.S. (1934, 1985). Thought and language. Cambridge, The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  62. Weick, K. E., & Bougon, M. G. (1986). Organisations as cognitive maps: Charting ways to success and failure. In H. P. Sims Jr. & D. A. Gioia (Eds.), The thinking organization: Dynamics of organizational social cognition (pp. 102–135). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  63. Weick, K. E., & Roberts, K. H. (1993). Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight desks. Administrative Science Quaterly, 38(3), 357–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Weick, K. E. (1969). The social psychology of organizing (2nd ed.). Addison Wesley: Reading, MA.Google Scholar
  65. Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Zander, U. (2002). The formation of international innovation networks in the multinational corporation: An evolutionary perspective. Industrial and Corporate Change, 11(2), 327–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Zárraga, C., & Bonache, J. (2005). The impact of team atmosphere on knowledge outcomes in selfmanaged teams. Organization Studies, 26(5), 661–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Zhang, Y., Sun, A., Datta, A., Chang, K., & Lim, E.-P. (2010). Do Wikipedians follow domain experts? A Domain-specific Study on Wikipedia knowledge building. In Proceedings of the 10th Annual Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (pp. 119–128). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  69. Zollo, M., & Winter, S. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science, (May–June), 339–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Zucker, L., Darby, M., & Armstrong, J. (2002). Commercializing knowledge: University science, knowledge capture, and firm performance in biotechnology. Management Science, 48(1), 138–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Léo Joubert
    • 1
  • Claude Paraponaris
    • 1
  1. 1.Aix Marseille Univ, CNRS, LESTAix-en-ProvenceFrance

Personalised recommendations