[Sigcrit-l] [Fwd: CFP on "Philosophical foundations of knowledge management"]

[Ron Day]

fyi.  Ron Day
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "omt-l" <omt-l at aom.pace.edu>
To: <omt-l at aom.pace.edu>
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 4:01 PM
Subject: omt-l V1 #883


> omt-l                          Mon, 6 Jun 2005           Volume 1 : Number 
> 883
>
> In this issue:
>
>        Fw: ORGANIZATION call for papers "The philosophical foundations of 
> knowledge management: Consequences for theory and practice"
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 21:09:36 +0100
> From: "PabloMdeH" <pmdeh at ie.edu>
> To: <omt-l at aom.pace.edu>
> Subject: Fw: ORGANIZATION call for papers "The philosophical foundations 
> of knowledge management: Consequences for theory and practice"
> Message-ID: <002f01c56ad3$ae1f55a0$2201a8c0 at Ometepe>
>
> Call for Papers
>
> ORGANIZATION
>
> Special Issue on
>
> The Philosophical Foundations of Knowledge Management:
> Consequences for Organization Theory and Practice
>
>
> Guest Editors:
> Andreas Georg Scherer
> University of Zurich, Switzerland
>
> J.-C. Spender
> Leeds University and Cranfield University, UK
>
> Deadline: July 31, 2005
>
>
> There is widespread agreement that organizations might usefully be
> re-considered as bodies, systems, or communities of knowledge, both
> cognised and articulated into practices, so complementing their regular
> definition as bundles of tangible assets or systems of explicit
> instruction and authority. Though "knowledge" has been a focus of
> philosophical study for centuries, an entirely new and, some might
> argue, philosophically naive literature of 'knowledge management' (KM)
> has emerged and is already exerting considerable influence over
> managerial and organizational practice.  Reviewing it one might be
> excused for concluding that almost everything now counts as knowledge:
> implicit know-how, personal experience, rule books, values, data,
> information, insights, as well as plans, programs, maps, organizational
> routines, narrations, practices, and social norms.  Tools and machines
> also embody knowledge.  Clearly we risk too ill-defined a base for
> effective new knowledge-based theories of either organization or
> management. But we still seek a definition of 'knowledge' precise enough
> to be useful for this.
>
> The philosophy of science already offers us a vast literature about
> distinguishing between scientific knowledge and non-knowledge, between
> true and false scientific claims.  Is this helpful?  Students of KM are
> increasingly familiar with alternative conceptions of scientific
> knowledge: Realism, Empiricism, Rationalism, Constructivism, and
> Postmodernism.  Yet, even for science, there is no agreement on a single
> epistemology or methodology of knowledge or practice.  Competing
> paradigms have become instead the basis for divergent proposals on how
> to develop theories of KM and organization.
>
>
>
> This Special Issue is not intended to produce yet another summary of
> what has been said so far, there are a number of these available
> already.  Rather the Special Issue should advance the discussion
> aggressively beyond established positions, perhaps along lines that
> address entirely new philosophical, theoretical, and practical
> questions.  It may also be that the way forward lies through a better
> understanding of the gulf between cognition and practice, between ideas
> and their implementation, a gulf that managers must negotiate daily but
> which academics seldom venture into.
>
>
>
> Specifically, this Special Issue seeks to strengthen our understanding
> of knowledge as relevant and useful to organization studies, to provide
> a framework for academic debate on the role of knowledge and its place
> in organization theory and the theory of the firm. We invite theoretical
> or empirical contributions that probe the philosophical foundations of
> knowledge management, especially those that compare the different
> philosophical conceptions' theoretical and practical implications.
> Relevant issues to consider are:
>
>
>
> 1.      What is an appropriate philosophical foundation for knowledge
> management?
>
>
>
> * How is organizational knowledge to be understood?  Is such
> knowledge a single coherent entity, a complex multi-faceted structure,
> or a complex of activities?  Is it an "it" at all?
> * What theoretically useful and practically relevant contributions
> can be drawn from the classical epistemologies such as realism,
> empiricism, constructivism, postmodernism?
> * Do managers need or use a pluralist epistemology?  If yes, how
> can one bridge across the different knowledge types and paradigms?
>
>
>
> 2.      What are the consequences for organization theory of taking
> knowledge seriously?
>
>
>
> * Do we need different types of organization theory to address
> different types of knowledge?
> * What are the appropriate knowledge-based notions of the
> organization/the firm?  A nexus of contracts?  A bundle of idiosyncratic
> assets/resources?  A system of routinized activities?  An intersection
> of resources and needs?  A system of cognitions and meanings?  What role
> might knowledge play in each of these notions?
> * If we adopt a non-totalizing post-modern approach, can we bridge
> across the resulting multiple notions of the organization/the firm?
>
>
> 3.      What are the consequences for management theory of taking
> knowledge seriously?
>
> * Can there be a division of knowledge like the division of labor,
> or can there only be a totalizing solution of 'shared knowledge'?
> * If we admit divergences, how can managers deal with a plurality
> of knowledge types and achieve their integration?  Is integration a
> useful concept?  What are the consequences for the management of meaning
> and organizational culture?
> * What are the relationships between a knowledge-based theory of
> the firm and managerial practice?
>
>
> Submission procedure
>
>
>
> Papers must be sent electronically and dated before August 1st, 2005
> (submitter's local date) to organization at som.umass.edu as Word email
> attachments, indicating Philosophical Foundations of Knowledge in the
> subject line.  Manuscripts should be prepared according to the
> guidelines published in every issue of ORGANIZATION, also at the
> journal's website:
> http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalManuscript.aspx?pid=105723&sc=1.  Papers
> should be between 5000 and 8000 words, exceptionally 10,000, and will be
> blind reviewed following the journal's standard process.  For further
> information contact the guest editors: Andreas Georg Scherer
> (andreas.scherer at iou.unizh.ch) or J.-C. Spender
> (jcspender at earthlink.net).
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of omt-l V1 #883
> ********************
>
>