FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W65842013> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W65842013 abstract "Every day people initiate intra-organisational searches for a wide variety of reasons and set out after a wide range of targets: analysts at the CIA try to unearth existing knowledge held on a suspected terrorist (e.g. Kean, Hamilton, Ben-Veniste, Kerrey, Fielding, Lehman, Gorelick, Roemer, Gorton, and Thompson, 2004); a manager attempts to locate a topic expert within a consulting firm (e.g. Singh, Hansen and Podolny, 2010); and a Xerox technician hunts for the colleague who might know an appropriate lfixr for a broken photocopier (e.g. Orr, 1996). This thesis reports detailed fieldwork into the social side of this intra-organisational search process. By doing so it aims to contribute to what social scientists know about the production of knowledge within organisations (Nelson and Winter, 1982; Dosi, Nelson and Winter, 2000; Nerkar and Paruchuri, 2005). The ubiquity of intra-organisational search can make the process appear mundane, but its nature and dynamics are central to explaining how knowledge is produced in organisations (e.g. March and Simon, 1958; Greve, 2003). Based on this insight, lknowledge-basedr (e.g. Kogut and Zander, 1992; Kogut and Zander, 1996; Galunic and Rodan, 1998) and evolutionary theories of the firm (e.g. Nelson and Winter, 1982; Narduzzo, Rocco, and Warglien, 2000) draw on the dynamics of intra-organisational search to explain the production of knowledge in organisations using the construct of organisational capabilities (e.g. Nerkar and Paruchuri, 2005). The image of the firm presented in this work is one where the trajectory of search, and thus learning and capability evolution, is influenced by organisational and social structure (Levinthal, 2000; Dosi and Marengo, 2007). To date, empirical research on intra-organisational search has focused on levels of analysis above the individual. For example, Hansen (1999, 2002), Hansen and Lovas (2004), Hansen, Mors and Lovas (2005) study search between project teams, Monteiro, Arvidsson and Birkinshaw (2008) study inter-divisional search and Rosenkopf and Nerkar (2001) study organisational search across intra-organisational boundaries. As a result, the role of the individual in intra-organisational search, while theoretically important (Dosi and Marengo, 2007), has traditionally been left as a lblack-boxr in empirical studies (Singh, Hansen and Podolny, 2010: 2). This allocation of empirical effort has left important assumptions about the micro-foundations of the search process unexplored. This thesis begins a program of research designed to empirically explore the social side of intra-organisational search process as it occurs at the individual level within organisational capabilities. Multiple empirical methods are used within a single-case to pursue this goal. A longitudinal case study is used to study how the co-evolution of organisational and social structure helps to shape the intra-organisational search environment and the trajectory of individual search. This study identifies perceptions of social risk as a potentially important theoretical mechanism linking the search environment and the trajectory of individual search. The next study draws on ethnographic fieldwork to both systematically investigate this process and then build theory that links an actorrs location in social structure to their perceptions of the search environment. The third and final study uses social network methods to analyse primary data on social structure and perceptions of the search environment within four specific technical capabilities within the case firm. The findings from these three studies question the assumption that actors perceive the intra-organisational search environment to be benign, which has long been common in theories of search (e.g. March and Simon, 1958: 51). Problematizing this assumption suggests that closer empirical and theoretical attention needs to be paid to how properties of the intra-organisational search environment influence the social production of knowledge within organisations. The primary reason for this impetus is that the nature of the search environment appears to be important to explaining when and why predictions of local search bias, an important mechanism in current theories of capability evolution and organisational learning (cf. Greve, 2003), may not hold in the context of intra-organisational search. But this contribution is also important because it helps ensure that existing theories of knowledge production are grounded in an empirically plausible account of what actors do and why they do it, which, as Dosi and Marengo (2007: 492) point out, is a central advantage of the knowledge-based and evolutionary theories of the firm.n" @default.
• W65842013 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W65842013 creator A5001910924 @default.
• W65842013 date "2012-01-01" @default.
• W65842013 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W65842013 title "Problemistic search and internal organisation: A study of how people find knowledge in complex organizations" @default.
• W65842013 hasPublicationYear "2012" @default.
• W65842013 type Work @default.
• W65842013 sameAs 65842013 @default.
• W65842013 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W65842013 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W65842013 hasAuthorship W65842013A5001910924 @default.
• W65842013 hasConcept C136197465 @default.
• W65842013 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W65842013 hasConcept C154945302 @default.
• W65842013 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W65842013 hasConcept C177264268 @default.
• W65842013 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W65842013 hasConcept C187736073 @default.
• W65842013 hasConcept C199360897 @default.
• W65842013 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W65842013 hasConcept C2776229289 @default.
• W65842013 hasConcept C36289849 @default.
• W65842013 hasConcept C39549134 @default.
• W65842013 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W65842013 hasConcept C67469775 @default.
• W65842013 hasConceptScore W65842013C136197465 @default.
• W65842013 hasConceptScore W65842013C144024400 @default.
• W65842013 hasConceptScore W65842013C154945302 @default.
• W65842013 hasConceptScore W65842013C162324750 @default.
• W65842013 hasConceptScore W65842013C177264268 @default.
• W65842013 hasConceptScore W65842013C17744445 @default.
• W65842013 hasConceptScore W65842013C187736073 @default.
• W65842013 hasConceptScore W65842013C199360897 @default.
• W65842013 hasConceptScore W65842013C199539241 @default.
• W65842013 hasConceptScore W65842013C2776229289 @default.
• W65842013 hasConceptScore W65842013C36289849 @default.
• W65842013 hasConceptScore W65842013C39549134 @default.
• W65842013 hasConceptScore W65842013C41008148 @default.
• W65842013 hasConceptScore W65842013C67469775 @default.
• W65842013 hasLocation W658420131 @default.
• W65842013 hasOpenAccess W65842013 @default.
• W65842013 hasPrimaryLocation W658420131 @default.
• W65842013 hasRelatedWork W10773695 @default.
• W65842013 hasRelatedWork W1483672588 @default.
• W65842013 hasRelatedWork W1489786108 @default.
• W65842013 hasRelatedWork W160486713 @default.
• W65842013 hasRelatedWork W1774803067 @default.
• W65842013 hasRelatedWork W1837558108 @default.
• W65842013 hasRelatedWork W1986019764 @default.
• W65842013 hasRelatedWork W2086548776 @default.
• W65842013 hasRelatedWork W2094440690 @default.
• W65842013 hasRelatedWork W2133837311 @default.
• W65842013 hasRelatedWork W2183715730 @default.
• W65842013 hasRelatedWork W22372481 @default.
• W65842013 hasRelatedWork W2486294059 @default.
• W65842013 hasRelatedWork W2578949243 @default.
• W65842013 hasRelatedWork W2763474932 @default.
• W65842013 hasRelatedWork W2767958596 @default.
• W65842013 hasRelatedWork W2937974539 @default.
• W65842013 hasRelatedWork W2964718331 @default.
• W65842013 hasRelatedWork W8945999 @default.
• W65842013 hasRelatedWork W93691889 @default.
• W65842013 isParatext "false" @default.
• W65842013 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W65842013 magId "65842013" @default.
• W65842013 workType "article" @default.