Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Collaboration structure and knowledge diffusion in Turkish management academia

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article proposes a conceptual framework to study diffusion of knowledge via collaborative social interactions. The framework primes deliberation on (i) nature of knowledg, (ii) chain of knowledge process, and (iii) modes of knowledge transfer while examining mechanisms of knowledge diffusion and collaboration structure. Within such a differentiation scheme while information is considered as a form of filtered data within a context of relevancies, knowledge is considered as a systematically processed information that is bound to individual or collective actions and praxis. The framework is applied employing an empirical research method based on meta-network analysis. The examplary case traces how management sciences related knowledge is diffused and what collaboration structures are exhibited by Turkish management academia from 1920s until 2008. Results from knowledge diffusion models which have been devised and tested in this study hint that management knowledge within local publications follows patterns of information diffusion rather than patterns of knowledge transfer found elsewhere. On the other hand, it is seen that cognitive demand of publishing in citation indexed global journals have given way to cohesive collaborating teams as mean of collaborative knowledge production and transfer.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See http://www.isiknowledge.com.

  2. Agglutinative means that words and sentences are made by adding suffixes to a root-word.

  3. Indeed, our extended exploratory and descriptive study at understanding nature and development of management science in Turkey via strategic diagrams, visualization of collaboration structures, analyzing interdisciplinarity in the field, generating map of knowledge over periods, examining productivity of scientists, etc. on the subject has strongly supports such a speculation (Ozel 2010). Please see Findings Chapter in http://www.cs.bilgi.edu.tr/~bulent/pubs/BulentOzel_PhD_Dissertation.pdf.

References

  • Abrahamson, E., & Rosenkopf, L. (1997). Social network effects on the extent of innovation diffusion: A computer simulation. Organization Science 8(3), 289–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly 45(3), 425–455.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Baum, J. A. C., Shipilov, A., & Rowley, T. (2003). Where do small worlds come from?. Industrial and Corporate Change 12, 697–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bettencourt, L. M. A., Kaiser, D. I., & Kaur, J. (2009). Scientific discovery and topological transitions in collaboration networks. Journal of Informetrics 3(3), 210–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breschi, S., Cassi, L., Malerba, F., & Vonortas, N. S. (2009). Networked research: European policy intervention in ICTs. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 21(7), 833–857.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J., & Reingen, P. (1987). Social ties and word-of-mouth referral behavior. Journal of Consumer Research 14(3), 350–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantner, U., & Graf, H. (2006). The network of innovators in Jena: An application of social network analysis. Research Policy 35(4), 463–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carley, K. (1991). A theory of group stability. American Sociological Review 56, 331–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carley, K. (2003). Dynamic network analysis: Worshop summary and papers (pp. 133–145). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carley, K. M., Reminga, J., Storrick, J., & De Reno, M. (2009). Ora user’s guide 2009. Technical report, Institute for Software Research, School of Computer Science. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Mellon University.

  • Cassi, L., Corrocher, N., Malerba, F., & Vonortas, N. (2008). Research networks as infrastructure for knowledge diffusion in european regions. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 17(7–8), 663–676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C., & Hicks, D. (2004). Tracing knowledge diffusion. Scientometrics 59(2), 199–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human-capital. American Journal of Sociology 94(Suppl. S), S95–S120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowan, R., & Jonard, N. (2004). Network structure and the diffusion of knowledge. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 28(8), 1557 – 1575.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, E., Lamb, R. (2000). Examining socio-technical networks in scientific academia/industry collaboration. In Chung, H. M. (Ed) Proceedings of Americas Conference on Information Systems (pp. 1625–1631). Long Beach CA: Association for Information Systems.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emirbayer, M. (1997). Manifesto for a eelational sociology.American Journal of Sociology 103(2), 281–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, L., King, C. III, & Juda, A. I. (2007). Small worlds and regional innovation. Organization Science 18(6), 938–954.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, L. (1979). Centrality in social networks i: Conceptual clarification. Social Networks 1, 215–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, L. (2004). The development of social network analysis. Vancouver, BC: Empirical Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fritsch, M., & Kauffeld-Monz, M. (2009). The impact of network structure on knowledge transfer: An application of social network analysis in the context of regional innovation networks. The Annals of Regional Science 43 (forthcoming).

  • Geisler, E. (2007). A typology of knowledge management: Strategic groups and role behavior in organizations. Journal of Knowledge Management 11(1).

  • Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology 78(6), 1360–1380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal (Winter Special Issue), 109–122.

  • Kogut, B., & Walker, G. (2001). The small world of germany and the durability of national networks. American Sociological Review 66, 317–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krackhardt, D. (1994). Graph theoretical dimensions of informal organizations. In Computational Organization Theory (pp. 89–111). Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates.

  • Krippendorff, K. (2004). Reliability in content analysis: Some common misconceptions and recommendations. Human Communication Research 30, 411–433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mannheim, K. (1968). Ideology and utopia : An introduction to the sociology of knowledge. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. K. (1968). Social theory and social structure. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mika, P., Elfring, T., & Groenewegen, P. (2006). Application of semantic technology for social network analysis in the sciences. Scientometrics 68(1), 3–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, S. A., & Van der Veer Martens, B. (2009). Mapping research specialties. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 42, 213–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, A. (2008). Gatekeepers of knowledge within industrial districts: Who they are, how they interact. Regional Studies 42(6), 817–835.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, A., & Rabellotti, R. (2009). Knowledge and information networks in an Italian wine cluster. European Planning Studies 17(7), 983–1006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neff, M. W., & Corley, E. A. (2009). 35 years and 160,000 articles: A bibliometric exploration of the evolution of ecology. Scientometrics 80(3), 657–682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Onder, C., Sevkli, M., Altinok, T., & Tavukcuoglu, C. (2008). Institutional change and scientific research: A preliminary bibliometric analysis of institutional influences on Turkey’s recent social science publications. Scientometrics 76(3), 543–560.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ozel, B. (2010). Scientific collaboration networks: Knowledge diffusion and fragmentation in Turkish Management Academia Ph.D. thesis. Istanbul: Istanbul Bilgi University.

  • Polanyi, M. (2009). The tacit dimension. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W. (1990). Neither market nor hierarchy: Network forms of organization. Research in Organizational Behavior 12, 295–336.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W., Koput, K., & SmithDoerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly 41(1), 116–145. 1994 SCOR Winter Conference, Stanford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riffe, D., Lacy, S., & Fico, F. G. (1998). Analyzing media messages: Using quantitative content analysis in research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

  • Scheler, M. (1980). Problems of a sociology of knowledge. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, J. (2000). Social network analysis: A handbook (2 ed.). Sage.

  • Singh, J. (2003). Social networks as drivers of knowledge diffusion. Technical report. Cambridge: Harvard University.

  • Singh, J. (2005). Collaborative networks as determinants of knowledge diffusion patterns. Management Science 51(5), 756–770.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Sorenson, O., & Fleming, L. (2004). Science and the diffusion of knowledge. Research Policy 33(10), 1615–1634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sousa, C., & Hendriks, P. (2006). The diving bell and the butterfly: The need for grounded theory in developing a knowledge-based view of organizations. Organizational Research Methods 9(3), 315–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, J. (2003). Global gatekeeping, representation, and network structure: A longitudinal analysis of regional and global knowledge-diffusion networks. Journal of International Business Studies 34(5), 428–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Usdiken, B., & Cetin, D. (2001). From betriebswirtschaftslehre to human relations: Turkish management literature before and after the Second World War. Business History 43(2).

  • Usdiken, B., & Wasti, S. A. (2009). Preaching, teaching and researching at the periphery: Academic management literature in Turkey, 1970–1999. Organization Studies 30(10), 1063–1082.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valente, T. W. (1995). Network models of the diffusion of innovations. Cresskill: Hampton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Structural snalysis in the social sciences. In Social network analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Watts, D..J., & Strogatz, S. H. (1998). Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature 393(6684), 440–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wellman, B. (1988). Structural analysis: From method and metaphor to theory and substance. In Social structures a network approach (pp. 19–61). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Willke, H. (2007). Smart governance: Governing the global knowledge society. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zollo, M., & Winter, S. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science 13(3), 339–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, Istanbul Bilgi University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Bulent Ozel

Authors
  1. Bulent Ozel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bulent Ozel.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ozel, B. Collaboration structure and knowledge diffusion in Turkish management academia. Scientometrics 93, 183–206 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0641-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0641-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation