Undertaking a review of the literature is an important part of any research project. The researcher both maps and assesses the relevant intellectual territory in order to specify a research question which will further develop the knowledge base. However, traditional 'narrative' reviews frequently lack thoroughness, and in many cases are not undertaken as genuine pieces of investigatory science. Consequently they can lack a means for making sense of what the collection of studies is saying. These reviews can be biased by the researcher and often lack rigour. Furthermore, the use of reviews of the available evidence to provide insights and guidance for intervention into operational needs of practitioners and policymakers has largely been of secondary importance. For practitioners, making sense of a mass of often-contradictory evidence has become progressively harder. The quality of evidence underpinning decision-making and action has been questioned, for inadequate or incomplete evidence seriously impedes policy formulation and implementation. In exploring ways in which evidence-informed management reviews might be achieved, the authors evaluate the process of systematic review used in the medical sciences. Over the last fifteen years, medical science has attempted to improve the review process by synthesizing research in a systematic, transparent, and reproducible manner with the twin aims of enhancing the knowledge base and informing policymaking and practice. This paper evaluates the extent to which the process of systematic review can be applied to the management field in order to produce a reliable knowledge stock and enhanced practice by developing context-sensitive research. The paper highlights the challenges in developing an appropriate methodology.

Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review

Undertaking a review of the literature is an important part of any research project. The researcher both maps and assesses the relevant intellectual territory in order to specify a research question which will further develop the knowledge hase. However, traditional 'narrative' reviews frequently lack thoroughness, and in many cases are not undertaken as genuine pieces of investigatory science. Consequently they can lack a means for making sense of what the collection of studies is saying. These reviews can he hiased by the researcher and often lack rigour. Furthermore, the use of reviews of the available evidence to provide insights and guidance for intervention into operational needs of practitioners and policymakers has largely been of secondary importance. For practitioners, making sense of a mass of often-contrad ictory evidence has hecome progressively harder. The quality of evidence underpinning decision-making and action has heen questioned, for inadequate or incomplete evidence seriously impedes policy formulation and implementation. In exploring ways in which evidence-informed management reviews might be achieved, the authors evaluate the process of systematic review used in the medical sciences. Over the last fifteen years, medical science has attempted to improve the review process hy synthesizing research in a systematic, transparent, and reproducihie manner with the twin aims of enhancing the knowledge hase and informing policymaking and practice. This paper evaluates the extent to which the process of systematic review can be applied to the management field in order to produce a reliable knowledge stock and enhanced practice by developing context-sensitive research. The paper highlights the challenges in developing an appropriate methodology.

http://www.oni.uerj.br/media/downloads/1-s2.0-S0048733399000554-main.pdf

The dynamics of innovation: from national systems and "Mode" 2 to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations.

Abstract The Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations is compared with alternative models for explaining the current research system in its social contexts. Communications and negotiations between institutional partners generate an overlay that increasingly reorganizes the underlying arrangements. The institutional layer can be considered as the retention mechanism of a developing system. For example, the national organization of the system of innovation has historically been important in determining competition. Reorganizations across industrial sectors and nation states, however, are induced by new technologies (biotechnology, ICT). The consequent transformations can be analyzed in terms of (neo-)evolutionary mechanisms. University research may function increasingly as a locus in the “laboratory” of such knowledge-intensive network transitions.

The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and

This essay argues that the success of organizations depends on their ability to design themselves as social learning systems and also to participate in broader learning systems such as an industry, a region, or a consortium. It explores the structure of these social learning systems. It proposes a social definition of learning and distinguishes between three `modes of belonging' by which we participate in social learning systems. Then it uses this framework to look at three constitutive elements of these systems: communities of practice, boundary processes among these communities, and identities as shaped by our participation in these systems.

Communities of Practice and Social Learning Systems

In this provocative and broad-ranging work, a distinguished team of authors argues that the ways in which knowledge  scientific, social and cultural  is produced are undergoing fundamental changes at the end of the twentieth century. They claim that these changes mark a distinct shift into a new mode of knowledge production which is replacing or reforming established institutions, disciplines, practices and policies. Identifying a range of features of the new moder of knowledge production  reflexivity, transdisciplinarity, heterogeneity  the authors show the connections between these features and the changing role of knowledge in social relations. While the knowledge produced by research and development in science and technology (both public and industrial) is accorded central concern, the authors also outline the changing dimensions of social scientific and humanities knowledge and the relations between the production of knowledge and its dissemination through education. Placing science policy and scientific knowledge in its broader context within contemporary societies, this book will be essential reading for all those concerned with the changing nature of knowledge, with the social study of science, with educational systems, and with the relations between R&D and social, economic and technological development.

The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies

Preface. Chapter 1: The Transformation of Society. Chapter 2: Beyond Modernity -- Breaching the Frontiers. Chapter 3: The Co--Evolution of Science and Society. Chapter 4: The Context Speaks Back. Chapter 5: The Transformation of Knowledge Institutions. Chapter 6: The Role of Universities in Knowledge Production. Chapter 7: How does Contextualization Happen?. Chapter 8: Weakly Contextualized Knowledge. Chapter 9: Strongly Contextualized Knowledge. Chapter 10: Contextualization in the Middle Range. Chapter 11: From Reliable Knowledge to Socially Robust Knowledge. Chapter 12: The Epistemological Core?. Chapter 13: Science Moves to the Agora. Chapter 14: Socially Distributed Expertise. Chapter 15: Re--Visioning Science. Chapter 16: Re--Thinking Science is not Science Re--Thought. References. Index

Re-Thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty

Introduction: `Mode 2' Revisited: The New Production of Knowledge

Under the prevailing contract between science and society, science has been expected to produce 'reliable' knowledge, provided merely that it communicates its discoveries to society. A new contract must now ensure that scientific knowledge is 'socially robust', and that its production is seen by society to be both transparent and participative.

Science's new social contract with society

The notion of context-sensitive science is put forward as a way to approach what might be meant by interactive social science. Universities are now operating in a social environment which values research but which also has the ability and in some cases the resources to play a greater role in influencing what research is carried out and how. The environment is ‘speaking back’ to science and society is looking for leadership in the production of context-sensitive science. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Michael Gibbons

Papers

The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies

Re-Thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty

Introduction: `Mode 2' Revisited: The New Production of Knowledge

Science's new social contract with society

Mode 2 society and the emergence of context-sensitive science