IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/jorsoc/v59y2008i12d10.1057_palgrave.jors.2602497.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scaling knowledge: how does knowledge accrue in systems?

Author

Listed:
  • J H Powell

    (Cardiff University)

  • J Swart

    (Bath University)

Abstract

This paper addresses the important and somewhat contentious matter of how knowledge accrues in a system. The matter has at its heart the establishment of a scaling function for knowledge (as distinct from the scaling used for information) which is related to the density of the knowledge structure at any point in the system. We commence with a discussion of whether it is possible at all to scale knowledge, dispensing with any concepts of knowledge as a simple finite resource and making a distinction between the establishment of a metric and the act of measurement itself. First, we draw on the Shannon–Weaver (H) measure to establish how knowledge can be seen as contributing to the partitioning of message sets under the H-measure. This establishes how knowledge contributes to the quantity of information held within a system when viewed as a meta-structure for that information. Second, we build on the idea of knowledge as an endemic property of a structure of interconnections between concepts. We observe that knowledge content can be dense both in structures that are highly interconnected deploying a modest number of concepts and in those where the interconnections are more sparse but where the number of concepts deployed is high. A scaling function exhibiting appropriate properties is then proposed. It can be seen that the scaling associated with knowledge as meta-information and the scaling deriving from the interconnectivity point of view are connected. This scaling function is particularly useful in three ways. Firstly, it outlines the properties of knowledge itself which can be used as criteria for future knowledge-based research. Its application in practice creates the ability to identify areas of knowledge concentration within a system. Finally, this identification of knowledge ‘hotspots’ can be used to direct the investment of resources for the management of knowledge and it provides an indication of the appropriate approach for the management of this knowledge. We make some observations on the limitations of the approach, on its potential as a basis for managerial action (particularly in Knowledge Management) and on its relevance and applicability to OR practice (particularly in respect of systems approaches to knowledge mapping). Lastly, we offer a view on the likely line of research which may result from this work.

Suggested Citation

  • J H Powell & J Swart, 2008. "Scaling knowledge: how does knowledge accrue in systems?," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(12), pages 1633-1643, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:pal:jorsoc:v:59:y:2008:i:12:d:10.1057_palgrave.jors.2602497
    DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602497
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602497
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602497?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. P J Dortmans & N J Curtis & N Tri, 2006. "An analytical approach for constructing and measuring concepts," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(8), pages 885-891, August.
    3. D Shaw & F Ackermann & C Eden, 2003. "Approaches to sharing knowledge in group problem structuring," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(9), pages 936-948, September.
    4. R Setiono & S-L Pan & M-H Hsieh & A Azcarraga, 2006. "Knowledge acquisition and revision using neural networks: an application to a cross-national study of brand image perception," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(3), pages 231-240, March.
    5. Philippe Baumard, 1999. "Tacit Knowledge in Organizations," Post-Print hal-03227234, HAL.
    6. Ikujiro Nonaka, 1994. "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 14-37, February.
    7. J Swart & J H Powell, 2006. "Men and measures: capturing knowledge requirements in firms through qualitative system modelling," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(1), pages 10-21, January.
    8. D Shaw, 2006. "Journey Making group workshops as a research tool," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(7), pages 830-841, July.
    9. P-S Deng & E G Tsacle, 2006. "Emergent learning behaviour in a simulated organization faced with tasks requiring team effort," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(5), pages 603-611, May.
    10. Haridimos Tsoukas & Efi Vladimirou, 2001. "What is Organizational Knowledge?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(7), pages 973-993, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Swart, Juani & Powell, John, 2012. "An analytical theory of knowledge behaviour in networks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(3), pages 807-817.

    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. Jamal Shamsie & Michael J. Mannor, 2013. "Looking Inside the Dream Team: Probing Into the Contributions of Tacit Knowledge as an Organizational Resource," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(2), pages 513-529, April.
    2. J S Edwards & B Ababneh & M Hall & D Shaw, 2009. "Knowledge management: a review of the field and of OR's contribution," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(1), pages 114-125, May.
    3. Ferguson, J.E. & Huysman, M.H., 2009. "Between ambition and approach: towards sustainable knowledge management in development organizations," Serie Research Memoranda 0003, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    4. M. Max Evans & Ilja Frissen & Anthony K. P. Wensley, 2018. "Organisational Information and Knowledge Sharing: Uncovering Mediating Effects of Perceived Trustworthiness Using the PROCESS Approach," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(01), pages 1-29, March.
    5. Frédéric CREPLET, 2004. "Les Portails d’entreprise : une réponse aux dimensions de l’entreprise « processeur de connaissances »," Working Papers of BETA 2004-07, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    6. Muhammad Jahanzaib Yousaf & Qamar Ali, 2018. "Impact of Knowledge Management on Innovation: Evidence from a South Asian Country," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(03), pages 1-18, September.
    7. G A Hindle & L A Franco, 2009. "Combining problem structuring methods to conduct applied research: a mixed methods approach to studying fitness-to-drive in the UK," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(12), pages 1637-1648, December.
    8. Till Blesik & Markus Bick & Tyge-F. Kummer, 2022. "A Conceptualisation of Crowd Knowledge," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 24(5), pages 1647-1665, October.
    9. Feldman, Maryann P. & Kogler, Dieter F., 2010. "Stylized Facts in the Geography of Innovation," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 381-410, Elsevier.
    10. Li, Xiaoqing & Roberts, Joanne & Yan, Yanni & Tan, Hui, 2014. "Knowledge sharing in China–UK higher education alliances," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 343-355.
    11. Liubertė Irina, 2019. "On Social Knowledge and Its Empirical Investigation in Contemporary Organisations," Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, Sciendo, vol. 81(1), pages 21-37, June.
    12. Thuy Do & Frédéric Le Roy & Thuy Seran, 2021. "Cooperation between global and local firms in emerging markets: a coopetition approach The case in Vietnam," Post-Print hal-03215229, HAL.
    13. Nancy Vargas & M. Begoña Lloria & Salvador Roig-Dobón, 2016. "Main drivers of human capital, learning and performance," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(5), pages 961-978, October.
    14. Chris Kimble, 2013. "Knowledge management, codification and tacit knowledge," Post-Print halshs-00826911, HAL.
    15. Beth A. Bechky, 2003. "Sharing Meaning Across Occupational Communities: The Transformation of Understanding on a Production Floor," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 312-330, June.
    16. Manjusha Thorpe & Tom Ridgman, 2016. "Identifying and Sharing the Knowledge Required for Scaling Up Innovative Technologies in the Process Industry," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(06), pages 1-22, December.
    17. Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2002. "Knowing in Practice: Enacting a Collective Capability in Distributed Organizing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 249-273, June.
    18. Frédéric CREPLET & Olivier DUPOUET & Francis KERN & Francis MUNIER, 2000. "Tie Organizational and Cognitive Duality of the firm with community concept," Working Papers of BETA 2000-08, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    19. Bernardo Batiz-Lazo & Jorge Gomes & Maria Mendes, 2002. "New Product Development & Management Of Knowledge In Portuguese Higher Education," Industrial Organization 0211019, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. François Therin, 2003. "Learning Organization and Innovation Performance in High-Tech Small Firms," Post-Print hal-00451466, 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:pal:jorsoc:v:59:y:2008:i:12:d:10.1057_palgrave.jors.2602497. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/ .

    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.