Advertisement

Knowledge Management from a Social Perspective: The Contribution of Practice-Based Studies

  • Silvia Gherardi
  • Francesco Miele
Chapter

Abstract

A social perspective on knowledge does not exist independently of social relations and social practices. This chapter illustrates the travel of ideas around knowledge management within a social perspective through three processual activities: sharing knowledge and keeping knowledge alive within a community’s practices; embedding knowledge in material practices; and innovating as an ongoing process. Thus, we argue that a social perspective on knowing is based on three types of relations established between practices and knowledge: a relation of containment (knowledge is a process that takes place within situated practices); a relation of mutual constitution (knowing and practising produce each other); a relation of equivalence (the equivalence between knowing and practising arises when priority is denied to the knowledge that exists before the moment of its enactment). A social perspective on knowledge management has taken several turns from the concept of the community of practice to the development of practice-based studies.

Keywords

Agencement Community of practice Knowing-in-practice Practices of a community Sociomateriality 

References

  1. Amin, A., & Cohendet, P. (2004). Architectures of knowledge: Firms, capabilities and communities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amin, A., & Roberts, J. (2008). Knowing in action: Beyond communities of practice. Research Policy, 37(2), 353–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ardichvili, A., Page, V., & Wetling, T. (2003). Motivation and barriers to participation in virtual knowledge-sharing communities of practice. Journal of Knowledge Management, 7(1), 64–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham/London: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blackler, F. (1995). Knowledge, knowledge work and organizations: An overview and interpretation. Organization Studies, 16(6), 1021–1046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boland, R. J., Jr., & Tenkasi, R. V. (1995). Perspective making and perspective taking in communities of knowing. Organization Science, 6(4), 350–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (1991). Organizational learning and communities of practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning and bureaucratization. Organization Science, 2(1), 40–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (2001). Knowledge and organization: A social-practice perspective. Organization Science, 12(2), 198–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bruni, A., & Gherardi, S. (2001). Omega’s story: The heterogeneous engineering of a gendered professional self. In D. Kerfoot, M. Dent, & S. Whitehead (Eds.), Managing professional identities. Knowledge, performativity and the new professional (pp. 174–198). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Bruni, A., Gherardi, S., & Parolin, L. L. (2007). Knowing in a system of fragmented knowledge. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 14(1-2), 83–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carlile, P. R. (2002). A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: Boundary objects in new product development. Organization Science, 13(4), 442–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carlile, P. R. (2004). Transferring, translating, and transforming: An integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries. Organization Science, 15(5), 555–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cecez-Kecmanovic, D., Galliers, B., Henfridsson, O., Newell, S., & Vidgen, R. (2014). The sociomateriality of information systems: Current status, future directions. Mis Quarterly, 38(3), 809–830.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ciborra, C. U., & Andreu, R. (2001). Sharing knowledge across boundaries. Journal of Information Technology, 16(2), 73–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Clegg, S. R., Hardy, C., & Nord, W. R. (Eds.). (1996). Handbook of organization studies. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  16. Clot, Y., & Béguin, P. (2004). Situated action in the development of activity. Activités, 1(1–2), 50–64.Google Scholar
  17. Contu, A., & Willmott, H. (2003). Re-embedding situatedness: The importance of power relations in learning theory. Organization Science, 14(3), 283–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cook, S. D. N., & Brown, J. S. (1999). Bridging epistemologies: The generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing. Organization Science, 10(4), 373–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1980). Mille plateaux: Capitalisme et schizophrénie II. Paris: Minuit.Google Scholar
  20. Dubé, L., Bourhis, A., & Jacob, R. (2005). The impact of structuring characteristics on the launching of virtual communities of practice. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 18(2), 145–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Duguid, P. (2005). ‘The art of knowing’: Social and tacit dimensions of knowledge and the limits of the community of practice. The Information Society, 21(2), 109–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Eberle, J., Stegmann, K., & Fischer, F. (2014). Legitimate peripheral participation in communities of practice: Participation support structures for newcomers in faculty student councils. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23(2), 216–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Faraj, S., & Sproull, L. (2000). Coordinating expertise in software development teams. Management Science, 46(12), 1554–1568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Faraj, S., Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Majchrzak, A. (2011). Knowledge collaboration in online communities. Organization Science, 22(5), 1224–1239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Feldman, M. S., & Orlikowski, W. J. (2011). Theorizing practice and practicing theory. Organization Science, 22(5), 1240–1253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fortané, N., & Keck, F. (2015). How biosecurity reframes animal surveillance. Revue d’anthropologie des connaissances, 9(2), a–l.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fox, S. (2000). Communities of practice, Foucault and actor network theory’. Journal of Management Studies, 37(6), 853–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Fox, S. (2006). Inquiries of every imaginable kind: Ethnomethodology, practical action and the new socially situated learning theory. The Sociological Review, 54(3), 426–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gherardi, S. (2000). Practice-based theorizing on learning and knowing in organizations: An introduction. Organization, 7(2), 211–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gherardi, S. (2006). Organizational knowledge: The texture of workplace learning. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  31. Gherardi, S. (2009). Community of practice or practices of a community? In S. Armstrong & C. Fukami (Eds.), The Sage handbook of management learning, education, and development (pp. 514–530). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gherardi, S. (2010). Telemedicine: A practice-based approach to technology. Human Relations, 63(4), 501–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gherardi, S. (2012). How to conduct a practice-based study: Problems and methods. Cheltenham, Gloss: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gherardi, S. (2016). To start practice theorizing anew: The contribution of the concepts of agencement and formativeness. Organization, 23(5), 680–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Gherardi, S., & Nicolini, D. (2002). Learning the trade. A culture of safety in practice. Organization, 9(2), 191–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Gherardi, S., & Perrotta, M. (2011). Egg dates sperm: A tale of a practice change and its stabilization. Organization, 18(5), 595–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Gherardi, S., Nicolini, D., & Odella, F. (1998). Towards a social understanding of how people learn in organizations. Management Learning, 29(3), 273–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Gray, B. (2004). Informal learning in an online community of practice. Journal of Distance Education, 19(1), 20–35.Google Scholar
  39. Guzman, G. (2009). What is practical knowledge? Journal of Knowledge Management, 13(4), 86–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hakken, D. (2003). The knowledge landscapes of cyberspace. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  41. Handley, K., Sturdy, A., Fincham, R., & Clark, T. (2006). Within and beyond communities of practice: Making sense of learning through participation, identity and practice. Journal of Management Studies, 43(3), 641–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hardie, I., & MacKenzie, D. (2007). Assembling an economic actor: The agencement of a hedge fund. The Sociological Review, 55(1), 57–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Hasrati, M. (2005). Legitimate peripheral participation and supervising Ph.D. students. Studies in Higher Education, 30(5), 557–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hislop, D. (2003). The complex relations between communities of practice and the implementation of technological innovations. International Journal of Innovation Management, 7(2), 163–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Hui, A., Schatzki, T., & Shove, E. (Eds.). (2016). The nexus of practices: Connections, constellations, and practitioners. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  46. Huysman, M., & Wulf, V. (2005). Introduction: The role of information technology in building and sustaining the relational base of communities. The Information Society, 21(2), 81–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Jones, M. (2014). A matter of life and death: Exploring conceptualizations of sociomateriality in the context of critical care. Mis Quarterly, 38(3), 895–925.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Josefsson, U. (2005). Coping with illness online: The case of patients’ online communities. The Information Society, 21(2), 143–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kimble, C., Grenier, C., & Goglio-Primard, K. (2010). Innovation and knowledge sharing across professional boundaries: Political interplay between boundary objects and brokers. International Journal of Information Management, 30(5), 437–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kuhn, T. (2017). Introduction to human relations virtual special issue ‘Knowledge and knowing in the study of organization: From commodity to communication. http://journals.sagepub.com/page/hum/collections/virtual-special-issues/knowledge-and-knowing
  51. Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford university press.Google Scholar
  52. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, MA: University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Law, J. (1994). Organizing modernity. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  54. Law, J., & Lien, M. (2013). Slippery: Field notes in empirical ontology. Social Studies of Science, 43(3), 363–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Leonardi, P. M. (2011). When flexible routines meet flexible technologies: Affordance, constraint, and the imbrication of human and material agencies. MIS Quarterly, 35(1), 147–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Lindkvist, L. (2005). Knowledge communities and knowledge collectivities: A typology of knowledge work in groups. Journal of Management Studies, 42(6), 1189–1210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Marabelli, M., & Newell, S. (2012). Knowledge risks in organizational networks: The practice perspective. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 21(1), 18–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. McDermott, R. (1999). Why information technology inspired but cannot deliver knowledge management. California Management Review, 41(4), 103–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Mele, C., & Russo-Spena, T. (2017). Innovating as a texture of practices. In C. Mele, T. Russo-Spena, & M. Nuutinen (Eds.), Innovating in Practice (pp. 13–41). Cham: Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Mol, A. (2002). The body multiple: Ontology in medical practice. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Mol, A. (2008). The logic of care: Health and the problem of patient choice. Abingdon/Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  62. Mol, A., & Law, J. (2004). Embodied action, enacted bodies: The example of hypoglycaemia. Body & Society, 10(2-3), 43–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Mørk, B. E., Hoholm, T., Ellingsen, G., Edwin, B., & Aanesta, M. (2010). Challenging expertise: On power relations within and across communities of practice in medical innovation. Management Learning, 41(5), 575–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Mugar, G., Østerlund, C., Hassman, K. D., Crowston, K., & Jackson, C. (2014, February). Planet hunters and seafloor explorers: Legitimate peripheral participation through practice proxies in online citizen science. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (pp. 109–119). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  65. Newell, S., Robertson, M., Scarborough, H., & Swan, J. (2002). Managing knowledge work and innovation. Basingstoke, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  66. Newell, S., Bresnen, M., Edelman, L., Scarbrough, H., & Swan, J. (2006). Sharing knowledge across projects: Limits to ICT-led project review practices. Management Learning, 37(2), 167–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Nicolini, D. (2007). Stretching out and expanding work practices in time and space: The case of telemedicine. Human Relations, 60(6), 889–920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Nicolini, D. (2011). Practice as the site of knowing. Insights from the field of telemedicine. Organization Science, 22(3), 602–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Nicolini, D. (2012). Practice theory, work, and organization: An introduction. Oxford: Oxford university press.Google Scholar
  70. Nicolini, D., Powell, J., Solano, L. M., & Conville, P. (2008). Managing knowledge in the healthcare sector. A review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 10(3), 245–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Orlikowski, W. J. (2007). Sociomaterial practices: Exploring technology at work. Organization Studies, 28(9), 1435–1448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Orlikowski, W. J., & Scott, S. V. (2008). Sociomateriality: Challenging the separation of technology, work and organization. The Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 433–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Orr, J. E. (1990). Sharing knowledge, celebrating identity: Community memory in a service culture. In D. Middleton & D. Edwards (Eds.), Collective remembering (pp. 169–189). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  74. Orr, J. E. (1996). Talking about machines: An ethnography of a modern job. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  75. Piras, E. M., & Miele, F. (2017). Clinical self-tracking and monitoring technologies: Negotiations in the ICT-mediated patient–provider relationship. Health Sociology Review, 26(1), 38–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal knowledge. Towards a post-critical philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  77. Preece, J. (1999). Emphatic communities: Balancing emotional and factual communication. Interacting with Computers, 12(1), 63–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Roberts, J. (2006). Limits to communities of practice. Journal of Management Studies, 43(3), 623–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Russo-Spena, T., Mele, C., & Nuutinen, M. (Eds.). (2017). Innovating in practice. Cham (Zürich): Springer International Publishing Switzerland.Google Scholar
  80. Schatzki, T., Karin, K.-C., & von Eike, S. (Eds.). (2001). The practice turn in contemporary theory. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  81. Strati, A. (2003). Knowing in practice: Aesthetic understanding and tacit knowledge. In D. Nicolini, S. Gherardi, & D. Yanow (Eds.), Knowing in organizations (pp. 53–75). Armonk: M.E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  82. Strati, A. (2007). Sensible knowledge and practice-based learning. Management Learning, 38(1), 61–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Suchman, L. A. (1987). Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine communication. Cambridge: Cambridge university press.Google Scholar
  84. Suchman, L. (1996). Constituting shared workspaces. In Y. Engeström & D. Middleton (Eds.), Cognition and communication at work (pp. 35–60). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Swan, J., Scarbrough, H., & Robertson, M. (2002). The construction of ‘communities of practice’ in the management of innovation. Management Learning, 33(4), 477–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Swan, J., Bresnen, M., Newell, S., & Robertson, M. (2007). The object of knowledge: The role of objects in biomedical innovation. Human Relations, 60(12), 1809–1837.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Swan, J., Scarbrough, H., & Ziebro, M. (2016). Liminal roles as a source of creative agency in management: The case of knowledge-sharing communities. Human Relations, 69(3), 781–811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Szulanski, G. (1996). Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(2), 27–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Teeuwsen, P., Ratković, S., & Tilley, S. A. (2014). Becoming academics: Experiencing legitimate peripheral participation in part-time doctoral studies. Studies in Higher Education, 39(4), 680–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Thompson, M. (2005). Structural and epistemic parameters in communities of practice. Organization Science, 16(2), 151–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Tsoukas, H., & Chia, R. (2002). On organizational becoming: Rethinking organizational change. Organization Science, 13(5), 567–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Tsoukas, H., & Vladimirou, E. (2001). What is organizational knowledge? Journal of Management Studies, 38(7), 973–993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Wasko, M. M. L., & Faraj, S. (2000). ‘It is what one does’: Why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9(2), 155–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Learning, meaning and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Wenger, E. C., & Snyder, W. M. (2000). Communities of practice: The organizational frontier. Harvard Business Review, 78(1), 139–145.Google Scholar
  96. Wenger, E. C., McDermott, R. A., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business Press.Google Scholar
  97. Yakhlef, A., & Essén, A. (2013). Practice innovation as bodily skills: The example of elderly home care service delivery. Organization, 20(6), 881–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Silvia Gherardi
    • 1
  • Francesco Miele
    • 1
  1. 1.University of TrentoTrentoItaly

Personalised recommendations