IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v10y1999i4p381-400.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bridging Epistemologies: The Generative Dance Between Organizational Knowledge and Organizational Knowing

Author

Listed:
  • Scott D. N. Cook

    (Department of Philosophy, San Jose State University, San Jose, California 95192, and Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, 3333 Coyote Hill, Palo Alto, California 94304)

  • John Seely Brown

    (Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, 3333 Coyote Hill, Palo Alto, California 94304)

Abstract

Much current work on organizational knowledge, intellectual capital, knowledge-creating organizations, knowledge work, and the like rests on a single, traditional understanding of the nature of knowledge. We call this understanding the “epistemology of possession,” since it treats knowledge as something people possess. Yet, this epistemology cannot account for the knowing found in individual and group practice . Knowing as action calls for an “epistemology of practice.” Moreover, the epistemology of possession tends to privilege explicit over tacit knowledge, and knowledge possessed by individuals over that possessed by groups. Current work on organizations is limited by this privileging and by the scant attention given to knowing in its own right. Organizations are better understood if explicit, tacit, individual and group knowledge are treated as four distinct and coequal forms of knowledge (each doing work the others cannot), and if knowledge and knowing are seen as mutually enabling (not competing). We hold that knowledge is a tool of knowing, that knowing is an aspect of our interaction with the social and physical world, and that the interplay of knowledge and knowing can generate new knowledge and new ways of knowing. We believe this generative dance between knowledge and knowing is a powerful source of organizational innovation. Harnessing this innovation calls for organizational and technological infrastructures that support the interplay of knowledge and knowing. Ultimately, these concepts make possible a more robust framing of such epistemologically-centered concerns as core competencies, the management of intellectual capital, etc. We explore these views through three brief case studies drawn from recent research.

Suggested Citation

  • Scott D. N. Cook & John Seely Brown, 1999. "Bridging Epistemologies: The Generative Dance Between Organizational Knowledge and Organizational Knowing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 381-400, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:10:y:1999:i:4:p:381-400
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.10.4.381
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.10.4.381
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.10.4.381?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ikujiro Nonaka, 1994. "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 14-37, February.
    2. Michael D. Cohen & Paul Bacdayan, 1994. "Organizational Routines Are Stored as Procedural Memory: Evidence from a Laboratory Study," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 554-568, November.
    3. Herbert A. Simon, 1991. "Bounded Rationality and Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 125-134, February.
    4. Karl E. Weick, 1991. "The Nontraditional Quality of Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 116-124, February.
    5. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1996. "What Firms Do? Coordination, Identity, and Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(5), pages 502-518, October.
    6. John Seely Brown & Paul Duguid, 1991. "Organizational Learning and Communities-of-Practice: Toward a Unified View of Working, Learning, and Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 40-57, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. TINA M. Jose Vega & Dennis M. López, 2012. "Evaluating The Effect Of Industry Specialist Duration On Audit Quality And Audit Fees," Working Papers 0023, College of Business, University of Texas at San Antonio.
    2. Cynthia A. Lengnick-Hall & Robert J. Griffith, 2007. "Knowledge Resources, Exploration, and Exploitation: A New Perspective on the Interplay Between Innovation and Application," Working Papers 0027, College of Business, University of Texas at San Antonio.
    3. Agulles, Remei & Prats, Mª Julia, 2011. "Learning in practice: What organizational and management literature can contribute to professional and occupational development," IESE Research Papers D/938, IESE Business School.
    4. Baba, Yasunori & Nobeoka, Kentaro, 1998. "Towards knowledge-based product development: the 3-D CAD model of knowledge creation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 643-659, February.
    5. Linda Argote & Ella Miron-Spektor, 2011. "Organizational Learning: From Experience to Knowledge," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1123-1137, October.
    6. Guido Fioretti, 2007. "A connectionist model of the organizational learning curve," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-16, March.
    7. Mehmet Ali Köseoglu & John A. Parnell & Melissa Yan Yee Yick, 2021. "Identifying influential studies and maturity level in intellectual structure of fields: evidence from strategic management," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1271-1309, February.
    8. Lam, Alice, 2004. "Organizational Innovation," MPRA Paper 11539, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Andrew Hargadon & Angelo Fanelli, 2002. "Action and Possibility: Reconciling Dual Perspectives of Knowledge in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 290-302, June.
    10. John Seely Brown & Paul Duguid, 2001. "Knowledge and Organization: A Social-Practice Perspective," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 198-213, April.
    11. Chris Kimble, 2013. "Knowledge management, codification and tacit knowledge," Post-Print halshs-00826911, HAL.
    12. Hong Y. Park & Hyejung Chang & Yong-Seung Park, 2015. "Firm’s knowledge creation structure for new product development," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(1), pages 1023507-102, December.
    13. Amit Jain, 2016. "Learning by hiring and change to organizational knowledge: Countering obsolescence as organizations age," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(8), pages 1667-1687, August.
    14. Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2002. "Knowing in Practice: Enacting a Collective Capability in Distributed Organizing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 249-273, June.
    15. Meier, Matthias & Weller, Ingo, 2010. "Wissensmanagement und unternehmensinterner Wissenstransfer," Discussion Papers 2010/16, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    16. Maurizio Zollo & Sidney G. Winter, 2002. "Deliberate Learning and the Evolution of Dynamic Capabilities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 339-351, June.
    17. Kexin Zhao & Bin Zhang & Xue Bai, 2018. "Estimating Contextual Motivating Factors in Virtual Interorganizational Communities of Practice: Peer Effects and Organizational Influences," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 910-927, December.
    18. Gabriel Szulanski & Dimo Ringov & Robert J. Jensen, 2016. "Overcoming Stickiness: How the Timing of Knowledge Transfer Methods Affects Transfer Difficulty," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 304-322, April.
    19. Robert Grant, 2013. "Reflections on knowledge-based approaches to the organization of production," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 17(3), pages 541-558, August.
    20. Chris Kimble, 2013. "What Cost Knowledge Management? The Example of Infosys," Post-Print halshs-00826906, HAL.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:10:y:1999:i:4:p:381-400. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.