The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Studying Knowledge Management in Information Systems Research: Discourses and Theoretical Assumptions1
Abstract
In information systems, most research on knowledge management assumes that knowledge has positive implications for organizations. However, knowledge is a double-edged sword: while too little might result in expensive mistakes, too much might result in unwanted accountability. The purpose of this paper is to highlight the lack of attention paid to the unintended consequences of managing organizational knowledge and thereby to broaden the scope of IS-based knowledge management research. To this end, this paper analyzes the IS literature on knowledge management. Using a framework developed by Deetz (1996), research articles published between 1990 and 2000 in six IS journals are classified into one of four scientific discourses. These discourses are the normative, the interpretive, the critical, and the dialogic. For each of these discourses, we identify the research focus, the metaphors of knowledge, the theoretical foundations, and the implications apparent in the articles representing it. The metaphors of knowledge that emerge from this analysis are knowledge as object, asset, mind, commodity, and discipline. Furthermore, we present a paper that is exemplary of each discourse. Our objective with this analysis is to raise IS researchers’ awareness of the potential and the implications of the different discourses in the study of knowledge and knowledge management.
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
Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815355 · Cited by 35,324
Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning
March, J. G. (1991) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.71 · Cited by 21,942
Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences
Bowker, G. C., & Star, S. L. (1999) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/6352.001.0001 · Cited by 6,188
Steps toward an ecology of infrastructure: Design and access for large information spaces
Star, S. L., & Ruhleder, K. (1996) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.7.1.111 · Cited by 3,238
Information Technology and Organizational Change: Causal Structure in Theory and Research
Markus, M. L., & Robey, D. (1988) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.34.5.583 · Cited by 2,108
Actualizing organizational memory with information systems
Stein, E. W., & Zwass, V. (1995) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.6.2.85 · Cited by 843
Walsh, J. P., & Ungson, G. R. (1991) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258607 · Cited by 835
An organizational memory approach: To information management
Anand, V., Manz, C. C., & Glick, W. H. (1998) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/259063 · Cited by 454
Information technology and organizational learning: a review and assessment of research
Robey, D., Boudreau, M.-C., & Rose, G. M. (2000) · Accounting, Management and Information Technologies · doi:10.1016/s0959-8022(99)00017-x · Cited by 377 · cited 1×
“…1998; Watson 1994), or descriptive studies and reviews (Amaravadi et al. 1992; Jones 1995; Maletz 1990; Mann et al. 1991; Mykytyn et al. 1990; Robey et al. 2000; Sarker and Lee 1999; Tuomi 1999/2000) were not coded because absent a theoretical lens and/or an interpretation of empirical data,…”
Background
Cited by
Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews
Paré, G., Trudel, M.-C., Jaana, M., & Kitsiou, S. (2015) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2014.08.008 · Cited by 1,987
When the Machine Meets the Expert: An Ethnography of Developing AI for Hiring
van den Broek, E., Sergeeva, A., & Huysman, M. (2021) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2021/16559 · Cited by 330
Power, Rationality, and the Art of Living Through Socio-Technical Change1
Avgerou, C., & McGrath, K. (2007) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/25148792 · Cited by 219
Templier, M., & Paré, G. (2018) · European Journal of Information Systems · doi:10.1080/0960085x.2017.1398880 · Cited by 180
Metadata
- Authors
- Schultze, U., & Leidner, D. E.
- Venue
- MIS Quarterly
- Publisher
- MIS Quarterly
- Published
- 2002-09-01
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 213-242
- ISSN
- 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-9730
- OpenAlex
- W2163219347
- Cited by
- 667
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 153.86
- 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
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.