| The Cognocratic Organization: Towards a Knowledge Theory of the Firm |
| | Santos, Filipe M. | Stanford U. | fsantos@stanford.edu | (650)-723-5743 |
| | This paper aims to present the foundations and contemporary approaches of a knowledge vision of the firm, and frame this new perspective in the traditions of organizational theory.
A pluralistic perspective of knowledge as justified belief is presented, and knowledge processes are described as cumulative, open-ended and context specific.
The link between knowledge and organizational action is emphasized, the distinction between knowledge and information is made clear and the consequences this distinction are explored.
The argument of embeddedness of a knowledge perspective in earlier organizational theories is presented, namely in scientific management theory and information processing views of the firm.
Afterwards, the foundations of a knowledge vision of the firm are explored and the contemporary perspectives on the knowledge based firm are developed.
An attempt is made to clarify and relate the different concepts and approaches proposed in the last decade and present the current understanding on the knowledge based firm.
The paper concludes that the emerging knowledge theory of the firm offers an integrative and important approach to the study of organizations, because it synthesizes recent findings in a number of different disciplines, offers a solution to some of the most important dichotomies of the field and presents a relevant view of organizations, capable of offering new insights on the functioning of organizations.
|
| | Keywords: knowledge ; theory of the firm |
| Patterns of Knowledge Distribution in Organizations |
| | Anand, Vikas | U. of Arkansas | vikan@asu.edu | (602) - 965-3999 |
| | Skilton, Paul F. | Arizona State U. | pskilton@asu.edu | (602) - 965-4530 |
| | Keats, Barbara W. | Arizona State U., Main | atbwk@asuvm.inre.asu.edu | 602-965-3431 |
| | We identify two dimensions along which organizations may vary in terms of their knowledge distribution. The first dimension describes whether organizational employees possess knowledge about similar or different areas. The second dimension describes whether an organization's knowledge is located within or outside its formal boundaries. The two dimensions give rise to four types of knowledge distribution patterns that can occur in organizations. We argue that the actual organizational pattern of knowledge distribution ultimately affects the relevance of knowledge-based activities such as acquisition, integration and creation. We also identify and classify mechanisms that can be used to integrate knowledge located outside organizational boundaries with that located inside. |
| | Keywords: organizational; memory; knowledge |
| The Architecture of Organizational Cognition |
| | Cabrera, Ángel | Instituto de Empresa | Angel.Cabrera@ie.ucm.es | +34-91-5639318 |
| | Allen, David B. | Instituto de Empresa | David.Allen@ie.ucm.es | +34-91-5639318 |
| | Current accounts of organizational learning, knowledge, capabilities and cognition share an underlying view of the organization as a "knowledge
system," a view which, some researchers have warned, still lacks sufficiently solid foundations. This paper contributes to constructing such
conceptual base by probing the theoretical implications of treating organizations as knowledge systems. It does so by applying a framework
from cognitive science, a young, multidisciplinary scientific enterprise which focuses on the study of the nature of different knowledge systems.
Probably the most solid conceptual pillar of current cognitive science is the notion of "levels of cognitive theory." According to this idea, a
knowledge system can be subject to three alternative levels of description and analysis: the knowledge level, the symbol level and the
physical level. This framework has proved very useful for cognitive science because (a) it has made complex cognitive phenomena more
manageable, (b) it has helped clarify the relationships between theories about seemingly unrelated phenomena, and (c) it has helped define
how alternative theories can be compared and confronted. In this paper, we claim that organization theory may be able to draw similar
advantages from this framework, and we propose ways to translate the framework into the language of organizations. |
| | Keywords: Organizational learning; Organizational cognition; Cognitive Science |