The DOI matches its Crossref record.
What is Organizational Knowledge?
Abstract
Organizational knowledge is much talked about but little understood. In this paper we set out to conceptualize organizational knowledge and explore its implications for knowledge management. We take on board Polanyi’s insight concerning the personal character of knowledge and fuse it with Wittgenstein’s insight that all knowledge is, in a fundamental way, collective. We do this in order to show, on the one hand, how individuals appropriate knowledge and expand their knowledge repertoires, and, on the other hand, how knowledge, in organized contexts, becomes organizational. Our claim is that knowledge is the individual capability to draw distinctions, within a domain of action, based on an appreciation of context or theory, or both. Organizational knowledge is the capability members of an organization have developed to draw distinctions in the process of carrying out their work, in particular concrete contexts, by enacting sets of generalizations whose application depends on historically evolved collective understandings. Following our theoretical exploration of organizational knowledge, we report the findings of a case study carried out at a call centre in Panafon, in Greece. Finally, we explore the implications of our argument by focusing on the links between knowledge and action on the one hand, and the management of organizational knowledge on the other. We argue that practical mastery needs to be supplemented by a quasi‐theoretical understanding of what individuals are doing when they exercise that mastery, and this is what knowledge management should be aiming at. Knowledge management, we suggest, is the dynamic process of turning an unreflective practice into a reflective one by elucidating the rules guiding the activities of the practice, by helping give a particular shape to collective understandings, and by facilitating the emergence of heuristic knowledge.
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
Cited by
Knowledge sharing in organizations: A conceptual framework
Ipe, M. (2003) · Human Resource Development Review · doi:10.1177/1534484303257985 · Cited by 1,608
Loebbecke, C., & Picot, A. (2015) · The Journal of Strategic Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2015.08.002 · Cited by 1,317
A Stupidity‐Based Theory of Organizations
Alvesson, M., & Spicer, A. (2012) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2012.01072.x · Cited by 534
Newell, S., & Marabelli, M. (2015) · The Journal of Strategic Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2015.02.001 · Cited by 494
Rashman, L., Withers, E., & Hartley, J. (2009) · International Journal of Management Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00257.x · Cited by 394
Metadata
- Authors
- Tsoukas, H., & Vladimirou, E.
- Venue
- Journal of Management Studies
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2001-11
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 973-993
- ISSN
- 0022-2380 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-6486
- OpenAlex
- W1982385531
- Cited by
- 1,138
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 138.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: What is Organizational Knowledge? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1467-6486.00268
- The paper
- Tsoukas, H., & Vladimirou, E. (2001). What is Organizational Knowledge? Journal of Management Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00268
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.