Abstract
This paper integrates the divergent epistemologies of the organizational learning view and the knowledge-creation view on how new knowledge is created in organizations. The former view adopts an information-processing perspective and emphasizes the importance of deep knowledge and higher-level learning, whereas the latter view adopts a social constructionist perspective and stresses the importance of tacit knowledge and interactive dialogue. The paper’s integration uses the theorization of knowledge levels; specifically, the shifts and movements in knowledge trajectories and the inverse relationship between the degree of tacitness and explicitness. The paper contributes greater coherence in our understanding of knowledge creation as well as generates new meaning/insights. The paper concludes by highlighting potential interpretations/insights and implications, before presenting limitations and future research directions.
Highlights
Organizational knowledge creation is the process of translating knowledge created by individual(s) into useful organizational knowledge (Nonaka & von Krogh, 2006, 2009)
This paper integrates the divergent epistemologies of the organizational learning view and the knowledge-creation view on how new knowledge is created in organizations
This paper was aimed at integrating the epistemological positions of the two most influential views on organizational knowledge creation ‒ the organizational learning view and the knowledge-creation view
Summary
Organizational knowledge creation is the process of translating knowledge created by individual(s) into useful organizational knowledge (Nonaka & von Krogh, 2006, 2009). The active view of organizations that the knowledge-creation view takes transcends that of the organizational learning view It regards organizations as creating new knowledge rather than just improvements in existing knowledge (Nonaka & Toyama, 2003); ‘When organizations innovate, they do not process information, from outside in, in order to solve existing problems and adapt to a changing environment. The discussion in the previous section suggests that perhaps there is value in integrating the two views Such integration, following the discussion above, would require an analysis that is able to reconcile the key differences between the two views in terms of: a) information processing and knowledge creation; b) tacit and deep knowledge; c) differences in levels of creative outcomes; and d) the role of deviance. Both the views, explicitly or implicitly, are referring to the case of higher-level knowledge for knowledge creation
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
