scholarly journals The probabilistic innovation theoretical framework

Author(s):  
Chris W. Callaghan

Background: Despite technological advances that offer new opportunities for solving societal problems in real time, knowledge management theory development has largely not kept pace with these developments. This article seeks to offer useful insights into how more effective theory development in this area could be enabled.Aim: This article suggests different streams of literature for inclusion into a theoretical framework for an emerging stream of research, termed ‘probabilistic innovation’, which seeks to develop a system of real-time research capability. The objective of this research is therefore to provide a synthesis of a range of diverse literatures, and to provide useful insights into how research enabled by crowdsourced research and development can potentially be used to address serious knowledge problems in real time.Setting: This research suggests that knowledge management theory can provide an anchor for a new stream of research contributing to the development of real-time knowledge problem solving.Methods: This conceptual article seeks to re-conceptualise the problem of real-time research and locate this knowledge problem in relation to a host of rapidly developing streams of literature. In doing so, a novel perspective of societal problem-solving is enabled.Results: An analysis of theory and literature suggests that certain rapidly developing streams of literature might more effectively contribute to societally important real-time research problem solving if these steams are united under a theoretical framework with this goal as its explicit focus.Conclusion: Although the goal of real-time research is as yet not attainable, research that contributes to its attainment may ultimately make an important contribution to society.

10.28945/3528 ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 177-199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris W Callaghan

Knowledge management research applied to the development of real-time research capability, or capability to solve societal problems in hours and days instead of years and decades, is perhaps increasingly important, given persistent global problems such as the Zika virus and rapidly developing antibiotic resistance. Drawing on swarm intelligence theory, this paper presents an approach to real-time research problem-solving in the form of a framework for understanding the complexity of real-time research and the challenges associated with maximizing collaboration. The objective of this research is to make explicit certain theoretical, methodological, and practical implications deriving from new literature on emerging technologies and new forms of problem solving and to offer a model of real-time problem solving based on a synthesis of the literature. Drawing from ant colony, bee colony, and particle swarm optimization, as well as other population-based metaheuristics, swarm intelligence principles are derived in support of improved effectiveness and efficiency for multidisciplinary human swarm problem-solving. This synthesis seeks to offer useful insights into the research process, by offering a perspective of what maximized collaboration, as a system, implies for real-time problem solving.


Author(s):  
Vestina Vainauskienė ◽  
Rimgailė Vaitkienė

The non-development of the concept of patient knowledge empowerment for disease self-management and the non-development of the theory of patient knowledge empowerment in patients with chronic diseases, cause methodological inconsistency of patient empowerment theory and does not provide a methodological basis to present patient knowledge empowerment preconditions. Therefore, the aim of the present integrative review was to synthesize and critically analyze the patient knowledge enablers distinguished in the public health management theory, the knowledge sharing enablers presented in the knowledge management theory and to integrate them by providing a comprehensive framework of patient knowledge enablers. To implement the purpose of the study, in answering the study question of what patient knowledge empowerments are and across which levels of patient knowledge empowerment they operate, an integrative review approach was applied as proposed by Cronin and George. A screening process resulted in a final sample of 78 papers published in open access, peer-review journals in the fields of public health management and knowledge management theories. Based on the results of the study, the Enablers of Patient Knowledge Empowerment for Self-Management of Chronic Disease Framework was created. It revealed that it is important to look at patient knowledge empowerment as a pathway across the empowerment levels through which both knowledge enablers identified in public health management theory and knowledge sharing enablers singled out in knowledge management theory operate. The integration of these two perspectives across patient empowerment levels uncovers a holistic framework for patient knowledge empowerment.


Author(s):  
David Schwartz

Defining and understanding knowledge is a rather broad and open-ended pursuit. We can narrow it considerably by stating that we are interested in defining and understanding knowledge as it pertains to knowledge management, rather than tackling the entire realm of epistemology. This article takes the theory of knowledge espoused by Aristotle and views it through the lens of knowledge management. The writings of Aristotle have proven to be fertile ground for uncovering the foundations of knowledge management. Snowden (2006) points to Aristotle’s three types of rhetorical proof as a basis for incorporating narrative in knowledge management. Buchholz (2006) traces the roots of ontological philosophy, forming the basis of current KM ontology efforts, back to Aristotle’s work. Butler in his Anti-foundational perspective on KM (2006), following Dunne (1993) argues that Aristotle’s Phrónésis and Téchné need to be at the core of knowledge management efforts – and while they cannot be directly applied to IT applications, must be among the elements upon which knowledge management is based. Müller-Merbach (2005) provides a look at the fundamentals of applying Aristotle to knowledge management theory.


Author(s):  
Parissa Haghirian

Knowledge is widely recognized as a primary resource of organizations (Drucker, 1992). Some authors propose that knowledge is a company’s only enduring source of advantage in an increasingly competitive world (Birkinshaw, 2001). The problem and challenge companies encounter is managing it in an effective way to increase their competitive advantages. Knowledge management is therefore concerned with various aspects of creating, examining, distributing, and implementing knowledge. But knowledge management theory often leaves us with the impression that knowledge can be as easily managed like products and commodities (Shariq, 1999). This Cognitive Model of Knowledge Management (p. 82) is founded on the belief that knowledge is an asset that needs to be managed, but is strongly contrasted by the Communities in Practice Model of Knowledge Management (p. 83), which looks at knowledge managment and transfer from a sociological perspective (Kakabadse, Kakabadse & Kouzmin, 2003). In fact, the transfer of knowlege happens between individuals; it is a mainly human-to-human process (Shariq, 1999). Knowledge has no universal foundation; it is only based on the agreement and the consensus of communities (Barabas, 1990), which make people and communities the main players in the knowledge transfer process. They can share or conceal knowledge; they may want to know more and want to learn. For knowledge transfer on an individual as well as on a corporporate level, there “has to be a voluntary action on behalf of the individual” (Dougherty, 1999, p. 264). Knowledge transfer happens for individuals and is conducted by individuals. The base of knowledge transfer is therefore a simple communication process transferring information from one individual to another. Two components of the communication are essential: The source (or sender) that sends the message and the receiver to receive the message. Person A (sender) intends to send information to person B (receiver). Person A codifies the information into a suitable form and starts the process of sending the information or knowledge to B. This can take place via talking or writing. The channel which transmits the information might influence the flow of the message and its reception. Receiver B receives the information and decodes it. After this, B tries to understand the information received in his/her context and implements the knowledge in the surrounding environment. The communication model also includes the feedback of the receiver. B starts the whole process again and codifies and sends information back to A. A receives, decodes, and interprets the information or knowledge received. A prerequisite for effective knowledge transfer is a high level of trust among the individuals and work groups and a strong and pervasive culture of cooperation and collaboration. This trust is developed through work practices that encourage and allow individuals to work together on projects and problems (Goh, 2002). Knowledge transfer is thus performed by communities of practice, which are described as groups of professionals informally bound to one another through exposure to a common class of problems, common pursuit of solutions, and thereby embodying a store of knowledge (Manville & Foote, 1996). Their members show a collectively developed understanding of what their community is about. They interact with each other, establishing norms and relationships of mutuality that reflect these interactions. Communities of practice generally produce a shared repertoire of communal resources, for example, language, routines, sensibilities, artifacts, tools, stories, and so forth. Members need to understand the community well enough to be able to contribute to it. They furthermore need to engage with the community and need to be trusted as a partner. Finally, they need to have access to the shared communal resources and use them appropriately (Wenger, 2000). Communities of practice develop strong routines for problem solving via communication and knowledge exchange. If knowledge is transferred within communities of practice, both sender and receiver have a common understanding about the context, the way knowledge is transmitted, its relevance, and integration into the knowledge base of the corporation. Accordingly, communities of practice are generally agreed on to have a positive influence on knowledge transfer processes. Members of a community of practice are informally bound by the gains they find when learning from each other and by efficient problem-solving activities via communication (Wagner, 2000).


Author(s):  
Marie-Josée Legault

This chapter proposes a new hypothesis to the refusal to cooperate from qualified professionals and supports it with five arguments drawn from the fields of sociology of work and professions. The management of knowledge (KM) is based, among other things, on a system for pooling knowledge to which employees must contribute. Nevertheless, the experts of KM persistently note the relative failure of knowledgepooling practices, particularly among the highly qualified professionals. Some experts have little to say about this issue and the scarce explanations they provide are highly unsatisfactory sociologically speaking and inspired by a folk psychology discourse. Sociology of work and professions, particularly, provide the grounds for alternative and more solid analysis of the phenomenon.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document