Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Management Learning
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Schneider, U.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Coping with the Concept of Knowledge

Ursula Schneider

University of Graz, Austria, ursula.schneider{at}uni-graz.at

It seems obvious that management activity, especially in the traditional understanding of the concept, has to rely on a clear concept of its `target' or the `object' that is to be planned, organized, led and controlled. Nevertheless, this does not apply to the management of knowledge — or should I say to the management of knowing; or rather to the management of the generative dance between those two concepts? Knowledge, knowing and their interplay, have been dealt with quite differently throughout history and in different cultures. Does it make sense to dive into the `philosophical morass' behind attempts to clarify a concept of knowledge that so easily escapes our definitional grip? Or should we live with a fuzzy notion in knowledge management? The latter is supported by the article. However it juxtaposes `enlightened' fuzziness, inspiring creative search to dogmatic certainty and exclusion, which increase the danger to sink intellectual and financial capital into dead ends.

Key Words: balanced gliding of meaning • (enlightened) ignorance • knowing • knowledge • language games

Management Learning, Vol. 38, No. 5, 613-633 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1350507607083396
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Management LearningHome page
R. Vince and B. Elkjaer
Breaking the Boundaries of Existing Knowledge: A Celebration of the 40th Anniversary of Management Learning
Management Learning, September 1, 2009; 40(4): 347 - 352.
[PDF]

Home page
 Management LearningHome page
D. Geiger and G. Schreyogg
Coping with the Concept of Knowledge: Toward a Discursive Understanding of Knowledge
Management Learning, September 1, 2009; 40(4): 475 - 480.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Management LearningHome page
D. Nicolini
Something Old, Something New and Something Puzzling: A Commentary on the Schneider-Geiger and Schreyogg Debate
Management Learning, September 1, 2009; 40(4): 487 - 492.
[Abstract] [PDF]