IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/120845.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Knowledge creation through multimodal communication

Author

Listed:
  • Berliant, Marcus
  • Fujita, Masahisa

Abstract

Knowledge creation either in isolation or joint with another person, using either face to face or internet contact and incorporating internet search ability is analyzed. Both a conceptual phase and a technical phase of research are analyzed, allowing workers to choose endogenously their mode of communication. In addition to formal knowledge, tacit knowledge plays an essential role in the knowledge production process. Lead time for face to face communication plays a key role in the optimal choice of communication mode. The sink point is inefficient. Our framework is applied to pandemic restrictions on face to face communication.

Suggested Citation

  • Berliant, Marcus & Fujita, Masahisa, 2024. "Knowledge creation through multimodal communication," MPRA Paper 120845, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:120845
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/120845/1/MPRA_paper_120845.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicholas Bloom & Charles I. Jones & John Van Reenen & Michael Webb, 2020. "Are Ideas Getting Harder to Find?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(4), pages 1104-1144, April.
    2. Marcus Berliant & Masahisa Fujita, 2008. "Knowledge Creation As A Square Dance On The Hilbert Cube," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 49(4), pages 1251-1295, November.
    3. Hiroyasu Inoue & Kentaro Nakajima & Tetsuji Okazaki & Yukiko U. Saito, 2022. "The Role of Face-to-face Contact on Innovation: Evidence from the Spanish Flu Pandemic in Japan," CIGS Working Paper Series 22-007E, The Canon Institute for Global Studies.
    4. David Atkin & M. Keith Chen & Anton Popov, 2022. "The Returns to Face-to-Face Interactions: Knowledge Spillovers in Silicon Valley," NBER Working Papers 30147, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Marcus Berliant & Masahisa Fujita, 2011. "The Dynamics of Knowledge Diversity and Economic Growth," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 77(4), pages 856-884, April.
    6. Monte, Ferdinando & Porcher, Charly & Rossi-Hansberg, Esteban, 2023. "Remote Work and City Structure," CEPR Discussion Papers 18311, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Philippe Aghion & Benjamin F. Jones & Charles I. Jones, 2018. "Artificial Intelligence and Economic Growth," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of Artificial Intelligence: An Agenda, pages 237-282, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Longqi Yang & David Holtz & Sonia Jaffe & Siddharth Suri & Shilpi Sinha & Jeffrey Weston & Connor Joyce & Neha Shah & Kevin Sherman & Brent Hecht & Jaime Teevan, 2022. "Author Correction: The effects of remote work on collaboration among information workers," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(1), pages 164-164, January.
    9. Peter Gordon, 2013. "Thinking about economic growth: cities, networks, creativity and supply chains for ideas," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 50(3), pages 667-684, June.
    10. Michael Gibbs & Friederike Mengel & Christoph Siemroth, 2023. "Work from Home and Productivity: Evidence from Personnel and Analytics Data on Information Technology Professionals," Journal of Political Economy Microeconomics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(1), pages 7-41.
    11. Natalia Emanuel & Emma Harrington & Amanda Pallais, 2023. "The Power of Proximity to Coworkers: Training for Tomorrow or Productivity Today?," NBER Working Papers 31880, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Xiao, Hongyu & Wu, Andy & Kim, Jaeho, 2021. "Commuting and innovation: Are closer inventors more productive?," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    13. Berliant, Marcus & Fujita, Masahisa, 2012. "Culture and diversity in knowledge creation," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 648-662.
    14. Marcus Berliant & Masahisa Fujita, 2009. "Dynamics of knowledge creation and transfer: The two person case," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 5(2), pages 155-179, June.
    15. Masayuki MORIKAWA, 2020. "Productivity of Working from Home during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Evidence from an Employee Survey," Discussion papers 20073, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    16. Marcus Berliant & Masahisa Fujita, 2011. "The Dynamics of Knowledge Diversity and Economic Growth," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 77(4), pages 856-884, April.
    17. Marcus Berliant & Masahisa Fujita, 2011. "The Dynamics of Knowledge Diversity and Economic Growth," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 77(4), pages 856-884, April.
    18. Diego Battiston & Jordi Blanes i Vidal & Tom Kirchmaier, 2021. "Face-to-Face Communication in Organizations," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 88(2), pages 574-609.
    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. Behrens, Kristian & Kichko, Sergei & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 2024. "Working from home: Too much of a good thing?," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    2. Berliant, Marcus & Fujita, Masahisa, 2012. "Culture and diversity in knowledge creation," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 648-662.
    3. José M. Gaspar, 2018. "A prospective review on New Economic Geography," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 61(2), pages 237-272, September.
    4. Tadashi Yagi, 2014. "Knowledge Creation by Consumers and Optimal Strategies of Firms," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 5(3), pages 585-596, September.
    5. Stijn Van Nieuwerburgh, 2023. "The remote work revolution: Impact on real estate values and the urban environment: 2023 AREUEA Presidential Address," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 51(1), pages 7-48, January.
    6. Pierpaolo Parrotta & Dario Pozzoli & Mariola Pytlikova, 2014. "The nexus between labor diversity and firm’s innovation," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 27(2), pages 303-364, April.
    7. Alessandra Fenizia & Tom Kirchmaier, 2024. "Not incentivized yet efficient: Working from home in the public sector," CEP Discussion Papers dp2036, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    8. Pablo Zarate & Mathias Dolls & Steven J. Davis & Nicholas Bloom & Jose Maria Barrero & Cevat Giray Aksoy, 2024. "Why Does Working from Home Vary across Countries and People?," CESifo Working Paper Series 11081, CESifo.
    9. Burdett, Ashley & Etheridge, Ben & Tang, Li & Wang, Yikai, 2024. "Worker productivity during Covid-19 and adaptation to working from home," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    10. Guillaume M. A. Morlet & Thomas Bolli, 2024. "Working from home is here to stay, but how does it affect workplace learning?," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, Springer;Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics, vol. 160(1), pages 1-19, December.
    11. Ryusuke Ihara, 2011. "Agglomeration with the pros and cons of labor heterogeneity," ERSA conference papers ersa11p528, European Regional Science Association.
    12. Fumihiko Isada & Yuriko Isada, 2015. "Trans-nationalisation of a main office in a multinational firm," International Journal of Business and Management, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences, vol. 3(4), pages 15-40, November.
    13. Basso, Henrique S. & Jimeno, Juan F., 2021. "From secular stagnation to robocalypse? Implications of demographic and technological changes," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 833-847.
    14. Venturini, Francesco, 2022. "Intelligent technologies and productivity spillovers: Evidence from the Fourth Industrial Revolution," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 220-243.
    15. Ajay Agrawal & Joshua Gans & Avi Goldfarb, 2019. "Economic Policy for Artificial Intelligence," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 19(1), pages 139-159.
    16. Janice C. dup Eberly & John dup Fernald, 2022. "Jackson Hole 2022 - Reassessing Economic Constraints: Potential Output (The Impact of COVID on Productivity and Potential Output)," Proceedings - Economic Policy Symposium - Jackson Hole, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, August.
    17. Julia Darby & Stuart McIntyre & Graeme Roy, 2022. "What can analysis of 47 million job advertisements tell us about how opportunities for homeworking are evolving in the United Kingdom?," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(4), pages 281-302, July.
    18. Eduardo A. Haddad & Jesus P. Mena-Chalco, Otávio J.G. Sidone, 2016. "Produção Científica e Redes de Colaboração dos Docentes Vinculados aos Programas de Pós-graduação em Economia no Brasil," Working Papers, Department of Economics 2016_10, University of São Paulo (FEA-USP).
    19. Bouchra Al MAWLA & George M. El KAZZI & Hiba S. OTHMAN, 2025. "Artificial intelligence as a disruptive force in economics: transformations, challenges, and future prospects," Theoretical and Applied Economics, Asociatia Generala a Economistilor din Romania / Editura Economica, vol. 0(2(643), S), pages 87-106, Summer.
    20. Max Nathan, 2015. "Same difference? Minority ethnic inventors, diversity and innovation in the UK," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(1), pages 129-168.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • L86 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Information and Internet Services; Computer Software

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pra:mprapa:120845. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.