The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Exploring knowledge creation processes as a source of organizational learning: A longitudinal case study of a public innovation project
Open accessAbstract
The purpose of the study is to reestablish the link between theories of organizational learning and knowledge creation – theories that in research, have been pursued as independent themes for almost two decades. Based on the literature review, I build a framework that proposes how the two streams of literature complement each other, how they are similar, and how they are different. To understand the framework’s empirical applicability, I utilize it as a theoretical lens to study an innovation project in a Danish public service organization. Based on a longitudinal and participatory research strategy, I build eight propositions that are used to discuss and extend the organizational learning and knowledge creation literatures and to justify the framework’s applicability. Finally, I present the managerial implications and the conclusions of the study.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning
March, J. G. (1991) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.71 · Cited by 21,942
A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation
Nonaka, I. (1994) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.5.1.14 · Cited by 17,809 · cited 5×
“the knowledge creation process initiates at the individual level with personal knowledge being generated via a sensemaking process (e.g., Cohen & Levinthal, 1990; Nonaka, 1994; Weick, 1995a).”
BackgroundInfluentialOrganizational learning: The contributing processes and the literatures
Huber, G. P. (1991) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.88 · Cited by 8,072
Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data
Langley, A. (1999) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1999.2553248 · Cited by 7,008
Burawoy, M. (1998) · Sociological Theory · doi:10.1111/0735-2751.00040 · Cited by 2,916
Multiparadigm perspectives on theory building
Gioia, D. A., & Pitre, E. (1990) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1990.4310758 · Cited by 1,426
Cited by
Shahzad, M., Qu, Y., Zafar, A. U., Rehman, S. U., & Islam, T. (2020) · Journal of Knowledge Management · doi:10.1108/jkm-11-2019-0624 · Cited by 681
Procedures for transferring organizational knowledge during generational change: A systematic review
Igoa-Iraola, E., & Díez, F. (2024) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e27092 · Cited by 11
Metadata
- Authors
- Brix, J.
- Venue
- Scandinavian Journal of Management
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-06
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 113-127
- ISSN
- 0956-5221 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2623012611
- Cited by
- 178
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 25.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Exploring knowledge creation processes as a source of organizational learning: A longitudinal case study of a public innovation project. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.scaman.2017.05.001
- The paper
- Brix, J. (2017). Exploring knowledge creation processes as a source of organizational learning: A longitudinal case study of a public innovation project. Scandinavian Journal of Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2017.05.001
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.