Book•
The knowledge-creating company : how Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation
01 Jan 1995-
TL;DR: In this article, Nonaka and Takeuchi argue that Japanese firms are successful precisely because they are innovative, because they create new knowledge and use it to produce successful products and technologies, and they reveal how Japanese companies translate tacit to explicit knowledge.
Abstract: How has Japan become a major economic power, a world leader in the automotive and electronics industries? What is the secret of their success? The consensus has been that, though the Japanese are not particularly innovative, they are exceptionally skilful at imitation, at improving products that already exist. But now two leading Japanese business experts, Ikujiro Nonaka and Hiro Takeuchi, turn this conventional wisdom on its head: Japanese firms are successful, they contend, precisely because they are innovative, because they create new knowledge and use it to produce successful products and technologies. Examining case studies drawn from such firms as Honda, Canon, Matsushita, NEC, 3M, GE, and the U.S. Marines, this book reveals how Japanese companies translate tacit to explicit knowledge and use it to produce new processes, products, and services.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors propose a theory of the evolution of U.S. industry management models based on three nested and interacting processes, and propose a method to identify the most important management models.
Abstract: In the last century and a half, U.S. industry has seen the emergence of several different management models. We propose a theory of this evolution based on three nested and interacting processes. F...
133 citations
Cites background from "The knowledge-creating company : ho..."
...difficult to select a clear start date for each revolution; thus studies such as by Freeman and Perez (1988) and Tylecote (1992) refer to a starting period rather than a specific year....
[...]
...…the business process model were addressed by various and partially intertwined problem-solving efforts, perhaps the most prominent of which was the one anticipated by Sieloff and known as ‘‘knowledge management’’ (e.g., Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995; Davenport and Prusak, 1998; Brown and Duguid, 2000)....
[...]
...…in Japanese companies such as Honda, Canon, and NEC to the theorization of Nonaka and Takeuchi (Takeuchi and Nonaka, 1986; Nonaka, 1991, 1994; Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995) and in particular to Nonaka and Toyama’s (2003) concept of ‘‘ba,’’ which seems close to that of community of practice (as…...
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, the authors explore the relationship between corporate foresight and the capability of the organization to respond successfully to external changes (i.e., strategic agility) and investigate the value that firms, facing growing uncertainty because of the fast pace of external changes, create through foresight.
132 citations
Cites background from "The knowledge-creating company : ho..."
...To describe the underlying processes through which routines develop and change, and thereby organizations learn from their actions and the feedback they receive from their environment, Nonaka and Takeuchi [62] introduced a four-stage spiral model based on the distinction between “tacit” and “explicit” knowledge....
[...]
TL;DR: A showcase symposium on the philosophical foundations of knowledge management (KM) was held at the AoM 2004 Meeting and was continued through KM tracks at the EURAM 2005 and EGOS 2005 Conferences as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: Our work on this Special Issue began with a showcase symposium on the philosophical foundations of knowledge management (KM) at the AoM 2004 Meeting and was continued through KM tracks at the EURAM 2005 and EGOS 2005 Conferences Our hope was to corral the variety of approaches in the KM literature and expose solid underpinnings against which the field's development might be gauged We were unclear whether these would be axiomatic principles that defined the field or a set of professionally accepted KM practices The call for papers went out in Fall 2004 and was published in the November 2004 issue ofOrganization In our call we asked for advances to the discussion rather than mere reiteration of the already appreciated Our authors and reviewers made great efforts and we learned much from their submissions, both those included and those turned away, and from the many reviews However, we found deep disagreements, both among our reviewers about the submissions—and among everyone about the topic area gener
132 citations
Posted Content•
TL;DR: In this article, the authors show the link between knowledge creation and individual learning, and the coherence that exists between the knowledge creation view and single and double-loop learning models by examining differences in levels of knowledge and their relationship with creativity and knowledge creating behaviours.
Abstract: This paper shows the link between knowledge creation and individual learning, and the coherence that exists between the knowledge creation view and single and double-loop learning models. It does so by examining differences in levels of knowledge and their relationship with creativity and knowledge creating behaviours. The analysis shifts the focus from the abstract notion of tacit knowledge to a more specific discussion on creative human cognition. The paper is unique in adopting an endogenous perspective to the analysis of individual learning. The analysis is distinct from previous discussions on knowledge creation in three ways: (a) explicit and tacit knowledge are analysed in terms of the nature and degree of inter-dependence that exists between the two; (b) knowledge levels are defined in terms of their applications rather than as abstract concepts; and (c) a distinction is made between shifts and movements in knowledge to separate, and subsequently integrate, the information processing and creative dimensions of learning. Further, the paper highlights specific challenges and limitations/costs that are associated with the transfer/acquisition of knowledge levels, and argues that in the absence of a conscious effort, knowledge levels are acquired through mistakes and failures. Following that, various theoretical and managerial implications to facilitate knowledge creation are discussed.
132 citations
Cites background from "The knowledge-creating company : ho..."
...The knowledge creation view (Nonaka, 1991, 1994; Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995) predominantly adopts an organizational perspective to the analysis of knowledge creation....
[...]
...Earlier, the knowledge creation view (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995) has remained detached from individual learning....
[...]
...The knowledge creation view considers that new knowledge is created through dynamic interactions between explicit and tacit knowledge (Nonaka, 1991, 1994; Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995)....
[...]
TL;DR: A networking process of continuous innovation based on KM is proposed by incorporating the phase of internalization, which would provide an approach for enterprises to leverage KM activities into continuous innovation.
Abstract: Purpose – The purpose of this research is to explore the mechanisms of knowledge management (KM) for innovation and provide an approach for enterprises to leverage KM activities into continuous innovation.Design/methodology/approach – By reviewing the literature from multidisciplinary fields, the concepts of knowledge, KM and innovation are investigated. The physical, human and technological perspectives of KM are distinguished with the identification of two core activities for innovation: knowledge creation and knowledge usage. Then an essential requirement for continuous innovation – an internalization phase – is defined. The systems thinking and human‐centered perspectives are adopted for providing a comprehensive understanding about the mechanisms of KM for innovation.Findings – A networking process of continuous innovation based on KM is proposed by incorporating the phase of internalization. Three sources of organizational knowledge assets in innovation are identified. Then, based on the two core ac...
132 citations
Cites background or methods from "The knowledge-creating company : ho..."
...The systems thinking and human-centred perspectives are adopted for providing a comprehensive understanding about the mechanisms of KM for innovation....
[...]
...…comparisons among knowledge production, creation and generation Activity Aspects Knowledge Production (KP) (Machlup, 1962) Knowledge Creation (KC) (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995) Knowledge Generation (KG) (Davenport and Prusak, 1998) Key concepts on knowledge Knowledge as business product; Knowledge…...
[...]
...In the community of creativity and innovation, human creativity and tacit knowledge are regarded as the main sources of continuous innovation (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995; Koskinen and Vanharanta, 2002)....
[...]
...The definitions evolve from “the justified true belief” (cited in Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995) and the object of interpretation (Spender, 1996), to the process of knowing and acting (Zack, 1998), to the capability for action and decision (Carlsson et al., 1996), and to the practice (Cook and Brown,…...
[...]
...…model (Ackoff, 1989) Institutional model (Landry et al., 2001) Concurrent and evolutionary model (Rothwell, 1994) SECI Spiral (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995) Social interaction model (Landry et al., 2001) Innovation with systemic integration (Rothwell, 1994) Nanatsudaki Model…...
[...]
References
More filters
TL;DR: The objective of KMS is to support creation, transfer, and application of knowledge in organizations by promoting a class of information systems, referred to as knowledge management systems.
Abstract: Knowledge is a broad and abstract notion that has defined epistemological debate in western philosophy since the classical Greek era. In the past few years, however, there has been a growing interest in treating knowledge as a significant organizational resource. Consistent with the interest in organizational knowledge and knowledge management (KM), IS researchers have begun promoting a class of information systems, referred to as knowledge management systems (KMS). The objective of KMS is to support creation, transfer, and application of knowledge in organizations. Knowledge and knowledge management are complex and multi-faceted concepts. Thus, effective development and implementation of KMS requires a foundation in several rich literatures.
9,531 citations
TL;DR: This research suggests that a knowledge infrastructure consisting of technology, structure, and culture along with a knowledge process architecture of acquisition, conversion, application, and protection are essential organizational capabilities or "preconditions" for effective knowledge management.
Abstract: A hallmark of the new economy is the ability of organizations to realize economic value from their collection of knowledge assets as well as their assets of information, production distribution, and affiliation. Despite the competitive necessity of becoming a knowledge-based organization, senior managers have found it difficult to transform their firms through programs of knowledge management. This is particularly true if their organizations have long histories of process and a tradition of business success. This research examines the issue of effective knowledge management from the perspective of organizational capabilities. This perspective suggests that a knowledge infrastructure consisting of technology, structure, and culture along with a knowledge process architecture of acquisition, conversion, application, and protection are essential organizational capabilities or preconditions for effective knowledge management. Through analysis of surveys collected from over 300 senior executives, this research empirically models and uncovers key aspects of these dimensions. The results provide a basis for understanding the competitive predisposition of a firm as it enters a program of knowledge management.
4,646 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors explore the nature of value co-creation in the context of service-dominant (S-D) logic and develop a conceptual framework for understanding and managing value cocreation.
Abstract: Central to service-dominant (S-D) logic is the proposition that the customer becomes a co-creator of value. This emphasizes the development of customer–supplier relationships through interaction and dialog. However, research to date suggests relatively little is known about how customers engage in the co-creation of value. In this article, the authors: explore the nature of value co-creation in the context of S-D logic; develop a conceptual framework for understanding and managing value co-creation; and utilize field-based research to illustrate practical application of the framework. This process-based framework provides a structure for customer involvement that takes account of key foundational propositions of S-D logic and places the customer explicitly at the same level of importance as the company as co-creators of value. Synthesis of diverse concepts from research on services, customer value and relationship marketing into a new process-based framework for co-creation provide new insights into managing the process of value co-creation.
3,114 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examined how aspects of intellectual capital influenced various innovative capabilities in organizations and found that human, organizational, and social capital and their interrelationships selectively influenced incremental and radical innovative capabilities.
Abstract: We examined how aspects of intellectual capital influenced various innovative capabilities in organizations. In a longitudinal, multiple-informant study of 93 organizations, we found that human, organizational, and social capital and their interrelationships selectively influenced incremental and radical innovative capabilities. As anticipated, organizational capital positively influenced incremental innovative capability, while human capital interacted with social capital to positively influence radical innovative capability. Counter to our expectations, however, human capital by itself was negatively associated with radical innovative capability. Interestingly, social capital played a significant role in both types of innovation, as it positively influenced incremental and radical innovative capabilities. It is widely accepted that an organization’s capability to innovate is closely tied to its intellectual capital, or its ability to utilize its knowledge resources. Several studies have underscored how new products embody organizational knowledge (e.g., Stewart, 1997), described innovation as a
3,008 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors outline a perspective on knowing in practice which highlights the essential role of human action in knowing how to get things done in complex organizational work and suggest that the competence to do global product development is both collective and distributed, grounded in the everyday practices of organizational members.
Abstract: In this paper, I outline a perspective on knowing in practice which highlights the essential role of human action in knowing how to get things done in complex organizational work. The perspective suggests that knowing is not a static embedded capability or stable disposition of actors, but rather an ongoing social accomplishment, constituted and reconstituted as actors engage the world in practice. In interpreting the findings of an empirical study conducted in a geographically dispersed hightech organization, I suggest that the competence to do global product development is both collective and distributed, grounded in the everyday practices of organizational members. I conclude by discussing some of the research implications of a perspective on organizational knowing in practice.
2,670 citations