IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

The Role of Argument and Narration in Knowledge Sharing: Coping with Context, Validity, and Coherence

  • Daniel Geiger
Registered author(s):

    This paper examines the way knowledge is shared within organizations. Although current research identifies narratives as an important medium for organizational knowledge sharing because they serve as sensemaking devices and collective memory, the study shows that narrative-based knowledge sharing encounters serious shortcomings and must frequently be supplemented by an argumentative mode of communication. Furthermore, the conditions that trigger a switch from a narrative to an argumentative mode of communication are specified. Doing so clarifies the limitations of a narrative mode of knowledge sharing and provides a more sophisticated understanding of the communication strategies that are used in virtual communities.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.vhb.de/sbr/pdfarchive.html
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by LMU Munich School of Management in its journal Schmalenbach Business Review.

    Volume (Year): 62 (2010)
    Issue (Month): 3 (July)
    Pages: 291-316

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:sbr:abstra:v:62:y:2010:i:3:p:291-316
    Contact details of provider: Postal: Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1, 80539 Muenchen
    Phone: 0049 89 2180 2166
    Fax: 0049 89 2180 6327
    Web page: http://www.sbr-online.com

    More information through EDIRC

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sbr:abstra:v:62:y:2010:i:3:p:291-316. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (sbr)

    The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask sbr to update the entry or send us the correct address

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.