Article Preview
TopIntroduction
Organizational knowledge creation is the process of translating knowledge created by individual(s) into useful organizational knowledge (Nonaka & von Krogh, 2006, 2009). Organizational knowledge creation is important because in the present-day knowledge-era where the widespread availability of information is taking competition to a new level, new knowledge is fast becoming the cornerstone of future success of organizations (Campanella, Derhy, & Gangi, 2019; Mehralian, Nazari, & Ghasemzadeh, 2018). Given this, it is imperative that we coherently understand organizational knowledge creation (Brix, 2017; Gärtner, 2013), without foregoing the freedom for varied interpretations and perspectives.
Organizational knowledge creation has been most influenced by two views ‒ the organizational learning view and the knowledge-creation view. These views have divergent epistemological positions on how new knowledge is created in organizations. Epistemology is the way knowledge is obtained or the way we understand the world, and is often contrasted with ontology, or the study of being, or the way things exist (Scotland, 2012). The organizational learning view traces knowledge creation in deep knowledge and higher-level learning and is popularly reflected in double-loop learning models (Argyris, 1977; Argyris & Schön, 1978, 1999). Learning is the process of gaining experience and developing cognitive and behavioural skills (DiBella, Nevis, & Gould, 1996; Leroy & Ramanantsoa, 1997). The knowledge-creation view, in contrast, emphasizes the importance of tacit knowledge and interactive dialogue (Nonaka, 1991, 1994; Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995). The two views offer divergent epistemologies; the organizational learning view is underpinned by the information-processing perspective (based on the individual-ontology), whereas the knowledge-creation view is underpinned by the social constructionist perspective (based on the collective ontology). However, in spite of the need for a coherent understanding of organizational knowledge creation, the epistemological positions of these two influential views remain to be integrated. This paper attempts to do just that.
This paper’s integrative attempt uses the theorization of knowledge levels advanced earlier in the literature (Akbar, 2003; also Akbar, Baruch, & Tzokas, 2008). Specifically, the paper uses the distinction between shifts and movements in knowledge to integrate learning and creativity, and the different degrees of tacitness of knowledge levels to integrate tacit and deep knowledge. The paper then uses the inverse relationship between the degrees of tacitness and explicitness to highlight the role of deviance in transferring/acquiring knowledge levels. The paper mainly focuses on the knowledge creation’s epistemological dimension and a detailed discussion on the knowledge creation’s ontological dimension is beyond its scope.
The paper's contribution is to bring greater coherence in our understanding of organizational knowledge creation and to open up freedom for variety of interpretations and new meaning/insights in the rather complex area of knowledge creation. The subsequent discussion first outlines the two views by highlighting their perspectives, focus, prescribed processes and creative outcomes. The next section identifies their underlying commonalities and key differences, including their relevant critique. The paper then integrates the two views based on the theorization of knowledge levels and their transformation advanced earlier in the literature. The paper concludes by articulating its contribution, implications, limitations and future research directions.