LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Gore, Tim (2011)
Publisher: Elsevier
Journal: Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: H1
The creation of new knowledge, as evidenced by trends in research publications is increasingly a collaborative affair. However, the epistemological assumptions underlying how we see knowledge are predominantly based on a view of knowledge as created and owned by individuals who may then ‘trade’ this ‘commodity’. These assumptions permeate the way we try to manage knowledge creation and dissemination – an issue of increasing centrality for universities. This paper examines the concept of epistemic communities from the strategic view of universities wishing to augment their role as knowledge producers and disseminators. It shines a light on underlying assumptions about the nature of knowledge and offers some alternative more socially oriented views to the prevailing individualist orthodoxy. The paper draws on a range of current studies and quotes expert witnesses to inform how universities could better widen their capacity for novel research, reaching out to a geographically dispersed network of experts and across national and organisational frontiers.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Allen, J., James, A. D. et al. (2007). Formal versus informal knowledge networks in R&D: A case study using social network analysis. R&D Management, 37(3), 179-96.
    • Assimakopoulos, D. & Yan, J. (2006). Sources of knowledge acquisition for Chinese software engineers, R&D Management, 36(1), 97-106.
    • Fuller, S. (2007). The knowledge book. Stocksfield: Acumen
    • Gibbons, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage.
    • Huston, L. & Nabil, S. (2006). Connect and develop: inside Procter and Gamble's new model for innovation. Harvard Business Review, 84(3), 58-67.
    • Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    • Krogh, G. V., Roos, J. & Kleine, D. (Eds.) (1998). Knowing in firms, understanding, managing and measuring knowledge. London: Sage.
    • Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: Chicago Press.
    • Kusch, M. (2002). Knowledge by agreement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    • Leonard, D. (2007). Knowledge transfer within organisations. In K. Ichijo and I. Nonaka (Eds.) Knowledge management and creation (pp. 57-68). New York: Oxford University Press.
    • Loffler, A. (2005). Kellogg on biotechnology. London: Kogan Page.
    • Macdonald, S. & Piekkari, R. (2005). Out of control: personal networks in European collaboration, R&D Management, 35(4), 441-53.
    • Nonaka, I. (1991). The knowledge creating company, Harvard Business Review, 85(7/8), 162-71.
    • OECD (2007). OECD Science, technology and industry scoreboard 2007. Paris: OECD.
    • Polanyi, M. (1983). The tacit dimension. Gloucester, MA: Peter Smith.
    • Prusack, L. & Weiss, L. (2007). Knowledge in organizational settings: How organizations generate, disseminate, and use knowledge for their competitive advantage. In K. Ichijo & I. Nonaka (Eds.) Knowledge creation and management (pp. 32-43). New York: Oxford University Press.
    • Tata Consultancy Services (2007). Co-innovation network (COIN). T. C. Services.
    • von Hippel, E. & Sonnack, M. (2006). Creating breakthroughs at 3M, Harvard Business Review, 77(5), 47-57.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article