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: 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
Cites background from "The knowledge-creating company : ho..."
...A knowledge-based perspective of the firm has emerged in the strategic management literature (Cole 1998; Spender 1996a, 1996b; Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995)....
[...]
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
Cites background from "The knowledge-creating company : ho..."
...This type of interaction and collaboration is important when attempting to transmit tacit knowledge between individuals or convert tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge, thereby transforming it from individual to organizational level [84, 85, 86, 87]....
[...]
...Collaboration is seen as one of the key manners in which knowledge is transmitted and created within the organization [49, 74, 87, 89, 98]....
[...]
...The formal organizational structures within an organization may encourage or inhibit interactions among employees, a practice seen as vital in the effective management of knowledge [49, 87, 89, 94]....
[...]
...Nonaka and Takeuchi [87] develop a new organizational...
[...]
...Collaboration between individuals is also the basis for the socialization of knowledge [87]....
[...]
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
Additional excerpts
...Knowledge may also be thought of as ‘tacit’ and ‘explicit’ (Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995)....
[...]
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
Cites background from "The knowledge-creating company : ho..."
...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....
[...]
...Not surprisingly, the process of innovation is commonly equated with an ongoing pursuit of harnessing new and unique knowledge (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995)....
[...]
...Several studies have underscored how new products embody organizational knowledge (e.g., Stewart, 1997), described innovation as a knowledge management process (e.g., Madhavan & Grover, 1998), and characterized innovative companies as knowledge creating (e.g., Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995)....
[...]
01 Feb 2009
TL;DR: It is suggested that the competence to do global product development is both collective and distributed, grounded in the everyday practices of organizational members, and not a static embedded capability or stable disposition.
Abstract: Knoving in practice: Enacting a collettive capability in distributed organizing - 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 o\ 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.
2,661 citations
Cites background from "The knowledge-creating company : ho..."
...…examine the various strategies, routines, and techniques through which different types of knowledge are created, codified, converted, transferred, and exchanged (Nelson and Winter 1982, Leonard-Barton 1992, Hedlund 1994, Nonaka 1994, Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995, Winter 1987, Teece 1998, Hansen 1999)....
[...]
...Indeed, “knowledge” has become the watchword of contemporary organizations, and research interest in knowledge, knowledge-based organizations, and knowledge management has accelerated (Kogut and Zander 1992, Starbuck 1992, Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995, Tsoukas 1996, Teece 1998)....
[...]
References
More filters
TL;DR: It is argued that organizations emerge to achieve the intensive use of the knowledge that is acquired to perform specific tasks and to integrate dispersedknowledge that is embodied in different human minds.
Abstract: This paper attempts to bridge a gap between organizational economics and strategy research through an analysis of knowledge and communication in organizations. We argue that organizations emerge to achieve the intensive use of the knowledge that is acquired to perform specific tasks and to integrate dispersed knowledge that is embodied in different human minds. The attributes of the tasks undertaken determine the optimal acquisition and distribution of knowledge. Depending on the codifiability of knowledge, different communication modes arise as a coordination mechanism to deepen the division of labor, leverage managerial talent, and exploit the increasing returns to knowledge. Organizational processes can be adapted through codes and culture to facilitate coordination; organizational structure can be designed to complement the limitations of human ability. We stress that organizational process and structure construct the core of organizational capital, which generates rent and sustains organizational growth. From the analysis, we draw implications for the strategic management of knowledge and human resources in organizations.
104 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors investigated the existence of a relationship among organizational knowledge creation processes (socialization, externalization, combination, and internalization) in Six Sigma DMAIC project, knowledge, Six Sigma project success, and organizational performance by using structural equation modeling.
104 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors suggest that cultural concepts such as culture, performativity, knowledge, and well-being have a certain cultural coherence that can be perhaps better glimpsed within a wider historical context.
Abstract: Over the last two decades, managerialism (Enteman, 1993) has become consolidated on multiple fronts. As a formula of governance, it has elaborated various vocabularies: the `audit society' (Power, 1997, 2007) has become entrenched in all types of organizations; surveillance methods (Lyon, 2001) have become increasingly dispersed and insidious; and — alongside —`new' concepts of subjectivity and the`self' are used to frame more intense regimes of self-discipline or what Tipton (1984) called `self-work'. These moves have been captured by Heelas (2002), Thrift (1997) and others in the term `soft capitalism'. In this article, we reflect upon this phenomenon by analysing some examples: `culture', `performativity', `knowledge' and `wellness'. Although they belong to a group often described as `fads' and `fashions' and dismissed as managerial `mumbo-jumbo', we suggest that their proliferation indicates a more stable cultural tendency of management discourses to capture subjectivity in its general agenda. We attempt to offer an historical-cultural interpretation from which this range of managerial concepts might be viewed. Our argument suggests that they have a certain cultural coherence that can be perhaps better glimpsed within a wider historical context. As a particular way in which managerialism frames its logic, analysing `soft capitalism' historically offers a reasonable basis for understanding the strength of its hard disciplinary edge as a regime of governance.
104 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors review the literature in HRD, organizational, and learning sciences, describing how individuals interact when creating knowledge collaboratively, and give an overview of the challenges with collaborative knowledge creation in open innovation teams.
Abstract: In open innovation teams, people from different organizations work together to develop new products, services, or markets. This organizational diversity can positively influence collaborative knowledge creation but can frustrate and obstruct the process as well. To increase the success rates of open innovation, it is vital to learn how individuals create knowledge in open innovation teams and the problems they face. However, HRD research on this topic is still lacking. This article reviews the literature in HRD, organizational, and learning sciences, describing how individuals interact when creating knowledge collaboratively, and gives an overview of the challenges with collaborative knowledge creation in open innovation teams. The article ends with a discussion and conclusion, and implications for further research.
104 citations
TL;DR: Factors underlying the selection of sources that require direct interpersonal contact and those that do not and factors that differentially affect the use of these types of sources are looked at.
Abstract: Although it has been argued that knowledge is an important organizational resource, little research has investigated where individuals go to search for information or knowledge. Prior work has investigated sources in isolation, but in an organizational setting, sources are encountered as an open portfolio instead of in isolation. It is important to understand how individuals perceive the wide array of sources available to them and how those perceptions affect their use of different types of sources. Building on prior work, this research looks at factors underlying the selection of sources that require direct interpersonal contact (relational sources) and those that do not (nonrelational sources) and explores factors that differentially affect the use of these types of sources. A sample of 204 working professionals recruited from graduate business studies was used to test hypotheses regarding the effects of accessibility and quality, as well as comparisons and trade-offs between relational and nonrelational sources. Consistent with prior work, source accessibility and quality significantly affect usage of a source. This relationship, however, is moderated by the type of source with accessibility having less effect on the use of relational sources. Furthermore, use of each type of source was also affected by the perceived accessibility and quality of alternative types of sources. Together these results highlight the importance of simultaneously considering the relational and nonrelational sources available to individuals. These results also have implications for the design and implementation of systems for managing information and knowledge assets.
104 citations