Philosophy and Knowledge: Discussions on Literature
Year: 2014
Type: preprint
Abstract: It is important to understand the significance of experiential reasoning behind this interpretive position of knowledge before it is transferred. Important because, the adaptation by the knowledge transfer practitioners involved purport to a position of justification in the transfer schema. Alvesson and Karreman (2001) advise that in addition to no agreed upon definition of knowledge within management literature, no structured underpinning commonality can be offered regarding the status of consequent knowledge transfer theoretical positioning. Continuing on this theme, Alvesson and Karreman (2001) assert that problems associated with knowledge transfer are indeed prevalent , as knowledge is difficult to define and manage as it can be ambiguous, unspecific and a dynamic phenomenon. Foss (1999) explains that a coherent and generally accepted working definition of knowledge for the organisational environment has yet to be established. Thompson and Walsham (2004) further stress that because knowledge is a subjective perspective of an individual’s experience, associated problems are inextricably related to the context of the knowledge itself. Von Krogh et al. (2000) retorts that personal resources also contribute. As such, many key authors focus on ways to understand and ultimately enhance this knowledge understanding, and in doing so, explore various propositions, using occidental foci, derived from historical secular concepts of: positivism (Gates 2001), empiricism (Gupta 2006) and rationalism (Katz 2000).
Source: SSRN Electronic Journal
Author: Michael Fascia
Institution: University of Oxford
Language: English
Subfield: Strategy and Management
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W2509942554