Responsive image
博碩士論文 etd-0724106-002206 詳細資訊
Title page for etd-0724106-002206
論文名稱
Title
情境知識的管理模式:探索知識內嵌的本質、情境學習與實踐中知曉
The Model for Managing Situated Knowledge:Exploring the Nature of Knowledge Embeddedness, Situated Learning and Knowing in Practice
系所名稱
Department
畢業學年期
Year, semester
語文別
Language
學位類別
Degree
頁數
Number of pages
133
研究生
Author
指導教授
Advisor
召集委員
Convenor
口試委員
Advisory Committee
口試日期
Date of Exam
2006-06-30
繳交日期
Date of Submission
2006-07-24
關鍵字
Keywords
知識管理系統、實踐中知曉、知識內嵌的本質、拼圖式管理模式、情境式學習
nature of knowledge embeddedness, knowledge management system, situated learning, knowing in practice, jigsaw style knowledge management
統計
Statistics
本論文已被瀏覽 5714 次,被下載 3875
The thesis/dissertation has been browsed 5714 times, has been downloaded 3875 times.
中文摘要
本研究是探討組織運用創新的知識管理系統轉移內部最佳實務時所面臨的挑戰。研究目的主要在於探討高科技產業中,工程師擁有高度個人化的知識且內嵌於實做當中,這種知識又深受情境因素的影響,組織應以什麼樣的模式促進知識工作者持續浮現實用的知識。本論文採用質性的個案研究法,以知識內嵌的本質與情境知識為理論觀點,探索兩家半導體公司導入管理模式來協助工程師轉移知識與經驗的過程。其中ChipMaker這家公司為半導體設備供應商,導入一套以系統主導的知識管理模式,藉系統來轉移工程師維修的最佳實務;而另一家ChipTest公司則以社群引導的知識管理模式,先嚴格要求後來演變為工程師定期聚會以分享彼此的經驗與面臨的問題。經過理論與質化資料的分析,本論文主要有三個研究發現。第一、從工程師維修工作發現情境知識的本質,這種知識是個人化認知且內嵌於工作情境之中,藉由工作情境的刺激而啟發多元化的解讀情境、依情境發展的社會網絡與隨伴著探索問題的即興對話與行動,才會持續地浮現情境知識。第二、既有許多文獻與實務上的應用並未釐清知識內嵌的本質就貿然採用「系統主導的知識管理模式」,以為組織可以直接管理「知識」與「知識工作者」的行為,本文卻發現系統僅能管理的是「知識物件」且只適用在情境穩定與單純的問題,甚至系統易誤導工程師進行表面性知識文件的交換。換言之,工程師急需的「情境知識」是一個透過社會互動中不斷再生與潛在轉移的過程,而非一種直接轉移的線性方式;因此,唯有情境式學習才能有效地分享內嵌本質的知識。第三、本論文發現組織也不太可能去管理特定場景才會浮現的「情境知識」,而是營造實踐中知曉背後的「社會結構」,此對話的結構必須具有下列四個特質:一、情境的刺激;二、多元面向的情境連結;三、群體的認同;四、集體隱喻的記憶,才能吸引成員持續地注入活動的能量,以維繫社群互動的活力。最後,本文從此兩個知識管理的案例發展出「物件式」,即大K小m【Km】與「拼圖式」,即小k大M(kM)這兩種知識管理模式並提出研究與實務意涵。
Abstract
This study explores the challenge faced when an organization utilizes innovative knowledge management system to transfer internal best practice. The objective of this study is to explore what model should be employed by an organization to promote continual emergence of practical knowledge for knowledge workers as this kind of knowledge is deeply affected by situated factors when high tech engineers have high level of personalized knowledge and are embedded in practice. By qualitative case study methodology, this study adopts theoretical views of the nature of knowledge embeddedness and situated learning to explore the process of two semiconductor companies implementing management models to help engineers transfer their knowledge and experiences. Of these two companies, the ChipMaker is a supplier of semiconductor equipment. It inputs a set of system based knowledge model to transfer best maintenance practices of engineers by this system. While the other ChipTest company operates community oriented knowledge management model. After strict instructions, engineers regularly gather to share their experience and problems they faced. After theoretical and qualitative data analysis, this thesis study has three major study findings. First, the nature of situated knowledge is shown from the maintenance jobs of engineers. This kind of knowledge is personalized cognition and is embedded in work situation. Diversified deciphering situations are developed via irritation of work situations. The situated knowledge can only be emerged from social network based on situation development and impromptu dialog and action accompanying problem exploration. Second, many existing literatures and practical applications do not clarify the nature of knowledge embeddedness, but adopt "system based knowledge management model", which assumes that an organization can directly manage "knowledge" and acts of "knowledge workers". However, this study finds that the system can only manage "knowledge object" and is only applicable to problems of steady and simple situations. Furthermore, the system inclines to misleading engineers exchange superficial knowledge documents. In other words, "situated knowledge" most needed by engineers is the process of continual reproduction and potential transfer through social interaction, not a linear manner of direct transfer. Therefore, only situated learning can effectively share knowledge of embedded nature. Third, this study finds that an organization is not likely to manage "situated knowledge" that is emerged only from specific situation, but manages "social structure" to nourish knowing in practice . This dialog structures must have the following four features: 1. situated stimuli, 2. multidimensional situation link, 3. group identities, 4. collectively implied memories. Only with these features, members can be attracted to continually input activity energy to keep vitality of community interaction. Finally, from two cases of knowledge managements this study develops two kinds of knowledge management models – "object style", i.e. big K and small m [Km], and "jigsaw style", i.e. small k and big M (kM) – and suggests their theoretical and practical implications
目次 Table of Contents
謝 詞----------------------------------------------------------------------------Ⅰ
中文摘要----------------------------------------------------------------------------Ⅱ
英文摘要----------------------------------------------------------------------------Ⅲ
目 錄----------------------------------------------------------------------------Ⅴ
表 次----------------------------------------------------------------------------Ⅷ
圖 次----------------------------------------------------------------------------Ⅸ

第一章 緒論----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1
第二章 理論背景與發展------------------------------------------------------------- 5
第一節 知識內嵌的本質------------------------------------------------------------- 5
第二節 情境式學習 ----------------------------------------------------------------12
第三節 實踐中知曉 ----------------------------------------------------------------16
第三章 研究方法 ------------------------------------------------------------------22
第一節 個案研究法 ----------------------------------------------------------------22
第二節 資料來源與田野經驗---------------------------------------------------------24
第三節 資料收集與詮釋的過程---------------------------------------------------- 27
第四節 研究場域的描述 --------------------------------------------------------- 30
第五節 質性研究的評析 ----------------------------------------------------------- 33

頁數
第四章 ChipMaker的知識管理案例 -------------------------------------------------- 36
第一節 ChipMaker個案背景的描述 -------------------------------------------------- 36
第二節 ChipMaker採用的知識管理模式 ---------------------------------------------- 40
一、基本邏輯 --------------------------------------------------------------------- 40
二、規劃式知識管理 --------------------------------------------------------------- 40
三、以系統引導轉移知識的行為 ----------------------------------------------------- 42
四、成效:表面性知識文件的交流 --------------------------------------------------- 46
第三節 資料分析:系統指標與工程師負面評價的說明 --------------------------------- 49
一、績效良好的系統指標:知識內嵌於物件的本質 ---------------------- ---------------49
二、工程師負面的評價:情境知識的本質 --------------------------------------------- 50
(一)情境引導維修行動的實例 ----------------------------------------------------- 51
(二)情境知識的本質 ------------------------------------------------------------- 54
第四節 以系統主導知識管理模式的反思---------------------------------------------- 63
第五章 ChipTest 的知識管理案例---------------------------------------------------- 64
第一節 ChipTest個案背景的描述 --------------------------------------------------- 64
第二節 ChipTest公司採用社群引導的知識管理模式 ----------------------------------- 64
一、基本邏輯 --------------------------------------------------------------------- 66
二、「主題式」的知識社群 --------------------------------------------------------- 68
三、以制度引導轉移知識的行為 ----------------------------------------------------- 71
四、成效:以社群活動改變工程師轉移知識的行為-------------------------------------- 76

頁數
第三節 資料分析:促進知識工作者持續浮現情境知識的說明 --------------------------- 85
一、 情境的刺激 ------------------------------------------------------------- 86
二、 情境的關連 ------------------------------------------------------------- 87
三、 群體的認同感 ----------------------------------------------------------- 89
四、 隱喻的記憶-------------------------------------------------------------- 90
第四節 以社群引導知識管理模式的反思---------------------------------------------- 93
第六章 研究意涵與結論------------------------------------------------------------- 91
第一節 詮釋「物件式」與「拼圖式」兩種知識管理模式 ------------------------------- 96
一、「物件式」知識管理模式:大K小m 【 Km 】 -------------------------------------- 96
二、「拼圖式」知識管理模式:小k大M 【 kM 】--------------------------------------- 97
第二節 研究意涵 ---------------------------------------------------------------100
第三節 實務意涵 -------------------------------------------------------------- 103
一、遠景(Vision):創造互動的模式 -----------------------------------------------104
二、規則(Rules):以簡單的規則引導活動 ------------------------------------------105
三、載體(Carrier):以知識工作者本身為主要的載體 --------------------------------105
四、激勵方式(Incentive):團隊的激勵方式 ----------------------------------------106
第四節 結論 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 108
參考文獻 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 111
簡歷------------------------------------------------------------------------------119
參考文獻 References
一、中文部分:
1. 方世杰、林麗娟,(2005)。「參與科技專案廠商之組織學習、社會資本與技術移轉之實證研究」,管理學報,第二十二卷第三期,頁 295-315。
2. 方世杰、蔡淑梨、羅育如,(2005)。「從知識市場效率觀點探討組織知識之創造」,中山管理評論,第十三卷第三期,頁695-720。
3. 方世杰、蔡馥陞、邱志芳,(2004)。「新產品開發團隊知識分享之研究:交易成本理論與社會交換理論之整合性觀點」,科技管理學刊,第九卷第四期,頁67-100。
4. 李書政、吳秀蘭、謝如梅 譯著,(2005)。知識管理: 理論與實務,麥格羅.希爾出版。
5. 尚榮安 譯,(2001)。個案研究,Robert,Case Study Research,弘智文化事業有限公司。
6. 胡瑋珊 譯,(2004)。企業創新的螺旋,野中郁次郎、竹內弘高,企業創新的螺旋,中國生產力中心。
7. 黃維 譯,(2003)。實踐社群推動學習型組織之輪,溫格、麥代謀、施耐德,天下遠見出版股份有限公司。
8. 劉常勇、陳木生、謝如梅,(2005)。「如何結合知識管理推動企業組織學習-以盛餘公司為例」,產業管理學報,第六卷第一期,頁 61-71。
9. 蔡敦浩、李慶芳、藍紫堂,(2004)。「知識管理路徑圖:一個整合性的新模式」,產業論壇,第六卷第四期,頁 47-74。
10. 蔡敦浩、陳可杰,(2002)。「質化研究在管理研究上的應用─三個個案的說明」,商管科技季刊,第三卷第一期,頁 43-55。
11. 藍紫堂,(2000)。知識管理系統建構之個案研究,中山大學企業管理研究所未出版之碩士論文。


二、英文部分:
1. Alavi, M. 1994. Computer-mediated collaborative learning: An empirical evaluation. MIS Quarterly, 18(2): 159-174.
2. Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. 2001. Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly, 25(1): 107-136.
3. Ambrosini, V., & Bowman, C. 2001. Tacit knowledge: some suggestions for operationalization. Journal of Management Studies, 38(6): 811-829.
4. Barley, S. R. 1996. Technicians in the workplace: Ethnographic evidence for bringing work into organization studies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(3): 404-441.
5. Blackler, F.1993. Knowledge and the theory of organizations: organizations as activity systems and the reframing of management. Journal of Management Studies, 30(6): 863-884.
6. Blackler, F. 1995. Knowledge, knowledge work and organizations: An overview and interpretation. Organization Studies, 16(6): 1021-1046.
7. Bobrow, D., & Whalen, J. 2002. Community knowledge sharing in practice: the Eureka story. Reflections: the SoL Journal on Knowledge, Learning, and Change, 4(2): 47-59.
8. Boland, R. J., & Tenkasi, R. V. 1995. Perspective making and perspective taking in communities of knowledge. Organization Science, 6(4): 350-372.
9. Boland, R. J., Tenkasi, R. V., & Te'eni, D. 1994. Designing information technology to support distributed cognition. Organization Science, 5(3): 456-477.
10. Bourdieu, P. 1977. Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
11. Bourdieu, P. 1998. Practical reason: on the theory of action. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.
12. Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. 1991. Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: toward a united view of working, learning, and innovation. Organization Science, 2(1): 40-57.
13. Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. 1998. Organizing knowledge. California Management Review, 40(3): 90-111.
14. Carlile, P. R. 2002. A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: boundary objects in new product development. Organization Science, 13(4): 442-455.
15. Carlile, P. R. 2004. Transferring, translating, and transforming: an integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries. Organization Science, 15(5): 555-568.
16. Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal D. A. 1990. Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1): 128-152.
17. Constant, D., Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. 1996. The kindness of strangers: the usefulness of electronic weak ties for technical advice. Organization Science, 7(2): 119-135.
18. Contu, A., & Willmott, H. 2003. Re-embedding situatedness: The importance of power relations in learning theory. Organization Science, 14(3): 283-296.
19. Cook, S. D., & Brown, J. S. 1999. Bridging epistemologies: The generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing. Organization Science, 10(4): 381-400.
20. Cross, R., & Sproull, L. 2004. More than an answer: Information relationships for actionable knowledge. Organization Science, 15(4): 446-462.
21. Davenport, T. H., & Klahr, P. 1998. Managing customer support knowledge. California Management Review, 40(3): 195-208.
22. Davenport, T. H., & Prusak, L. 1997. Working knowledge: how organizations manage what they know, Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
23. Dewey, J. 1938. Logic: the theory of inquiry, New York: Holt and Company.
24. Dougherty, D. 1992. A practice-centered model of organizational renewal through product innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 13(Special Issue): 77-92.
25. Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. 1998. The relational view: cooperative strategy and sources of inter-organizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(4): 660-679.
26. Dyer, W. G., & Wilkins, A. L. 1991. Better stories, not better constructs, to generate better theory: a rejoinder to eisenhardt. Academy of Management Review, 16(3): 613-619.
27. Eden, C., & Ackermann, F. 2002. A mapping framework for strategic making. In Huff, A. S., & Jenkins, M. (Eds.) Mapping strategic knowledge: 173-195. London: Sage.
28. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 532-550.
29. Ellingsen, G., & Monteiro, E. 2003. Mechanisms for producing a working knowledge: enacting, orchestrating, and organizing. Information & Organization, 13: 209-229.
30. Gherardi, S. 2000. Practice-based theorizing on learning and knowing in organizations. Organization, 7: 329-349.
31. Giddens, A. 1984. The Constitution of Society. Polity Press, Cambridge, UK.
32. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine Publishing, Chicago, IL.
33. Golden-Biddle, K., & Locke, K. 1993. Appealing work: an investigation of how ethnographic texts convince. Organization Science, 4(4): 595-616.
34. Granovetter, M. 1985. Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3): 481-510.
35. Grant, R. M. 1996. Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(winter):109-122.
36. Hansen, M. T. 2002. Knowledge networks: explaining effective knowledge sharing in multiunit companies. Organization Science, 13(3): 232-248.
37. Hansen, M. T., Nohria, N., & Tierney, T. 1999. What’s your strategy for managing knowledge? Harvard Business Review, 77(2): 106-16.
38. Hayes, N., & Walsham, G. 2001. Participation in groupware-mediated communities of practice: a socio-political analysis of knowledge working. Information & Organization, 11: 263-288.
39. Huber, G. P. 2001. Transfer of knowledge in knowledge management systems: Unexplored issues and suggested studies. European Journal of Information Systems, 10(2): 72-79.
40. Hutcheson, G. D., & Hutcheson, J. D. 1996. Technology and economics in the semiconductor industry. Scientific American, 274(1): 54-59.
41. Hsiao, R.L. 2006. Research without Numbers: Introduction to Dialectical Research Methodology, Pearson.( forthcoming)
42. Hsiao, R.L., Tsai, D.H., & Lee, C. F. 2006. The problems of embeddedness: knowledge transfer, coordination and reuse in information systems. Organization Studies, (forthcoming).
43. Hsiao, R.L., Tsai, D.H., & Lee, C. F. 2004. Knowing in practice: interpreting knowledge work and the adoption of a knowledge-sharing system. Academy of Management Annual Meeting, New Orleans, August 6-11.
44. Kellogg, K.C., Orlikowski, W.J. & Yates, J. 2006. Life in the trading zone: structuring coordination across boundaries in postbureaucratic organizations. Organization Science, 17(1): 22-44.
45. Klein, H. K., & Myers, M. D. 1999. A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretative field studies in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 23(1): 67-94.
46. Kogut, B., & Zander, U. 1992. Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 3(3): 383-397.
47. Kostova, T. 1999. Transformational transfer of strategic organizational practices: a contextual perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24(2): 308-324.
48. Lam, A. 1997. Embedded firms, embedded knowledge: problem of collaboration and knowledge transfer in global cooperative ventures. Organization Studies, 18(6): 973-996.
49. Lam, A. 2000. Tacit knowledge, organizational learning and societal institutions: an integrated framework. Organizational Studies, 21(3): 487-513.
50. Langley, A. 1999. Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4): 691-710.
51. Lave, J. 1988. Cognition in Practice: Mind, Mathematics, and Culture in Everyday Life, New York: Cambridge University Press.
52. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. 1991. Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
53. Lee, G. K., & Cole, R. E. 2003. From a firm-based to a community-based model of knowledge creation: the case of the linux kernel development. Organization Science, 14(6): 633-649.
54. Leidner, D. E., & Jarvenpaa, S. L. 1995. The use of information technology to enhance management school education: A theoretical view. MIS Quarterly, 19(3): 265-291.
55. Markus, M. L. 2001. Toward a theory of knowledge reuse: types of knowledge reuse situations and factors in reuse success. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1): 57-93.
56. McDermott, R. 1999. Why information technology inspired but cannot deliver knowledge management. California Management Review, 41(4): 103-117.
57. Nidumolu, S. R., Subramani, M., & Aldrich, A. 2001. Situated learning and the situated knowledge web: Exploring the ground beneath knowledge management. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18 (1): 115-50.
58. Nonaka, I. 1994. A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5(1): 14-37.
59. Nonaka, I., & Konno, N. 1998. The concept of 'Ba': building a foundation for knowledge creation. California Management Review, 40(3): 40-54.
60. Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. 1995. The Knowledge-Creating Company: How the Japanese Create the Dynamics of Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
61. Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., & Byosière, P. 2001. A theory of organizational creation: understanding the dynamic process of creating knowledge, Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge, (eds.) M. Dierkes, A. B. Antal, J. Child, and I. Nonaka. New York: Oxford University Press.
62. O'Dell, A., & Grayson, C. J. 1998. If only we know what we know: identification and transfer of internal best practices. California Management Review, 40(3): 154-174.
63. Orlikowski, W. J. 2000. Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organization Science, 11(4): 404–428.
64. Orlikowski, W. J. 2002. Knowing in practice: enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing. Organization Science, 13(3): 249-273.
65. Orlikowski, W. J., Yates, J., Okamura, K. & Fujimoto, M. 1995. Shaping electronic communication: The metastructuring of technology in the context of use. Organization Science, 6(4): 423–444.
66. Orr, J. E. 1996. Talking about machines: An ethnography of a modern job. Ithaca, N.Y.: ILR Press.
67. Pentland, B. T. 1995. Information systems and organizational learning: the social epistemology of organizational knowledge systems. Accounting Management and Information Technologies, 5(1): 1-21.
68. Pickering, J. M., & King, J. L. 1995. Hardwiring weak ties: inter-organizational computer-mediated communication, occupational communities and organizational change. Organization Science, 6(4): 479-486.
69. Polanyi, M. 1966. The Tacit Dimension, Garden City, NY: Anchor.
70. Polanyi, M. 1974. Personal Knowledge. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
71. Powell, W. W. 1990. Neither Market nor Hierarchy: Network Forms of Organization. Research in Organizational Behavior, 12: 295-336.
72. Purvis, R. L., Sambamurthy, V., & Zmud, R. W. 2001. The assimilation of knowledge platforms in organizations: An empirical investigation. Organization Science, 12(2): 117-135.
73. Rivikin, J. W. 2001. Reproducing knowledge: replication without imitation at moderate complexity. Organization Science, 12(3): 274-293.
74. Ruggles, R. 1998. The state of the notion: Knowledge management in practice. California Management Review, 40(3): 80-90.
75. Sambamurthy, V. & Subramani, M. 2005. Special issue in information technologies and knowledge management. MIS Quarterly, 29(1): 1-7.
76. Schultze, U. 1999. Investigating the contradictions in knowledge management. In Larsen, T.J., Levine, L., & deGross, J.I. (Eds.), Information Systems: Current Issues and Future Changes: 155-174. IFIP, Laxenberg,
77. Schultze, U. 2000. A confessional account of ethnography about knowledge work. MIS Quarterly, 24(1): 3-41.
78. Schultze, U., & Boland, R. J. 2000. Knowledge management technology and the reproduction of knowledge work practices. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9: 193-212.
79. Snowden, D. 2002. Complex acts of knowing: paradox and descriptive self-awareness. Journal of Knowledge Management, 6(2): 100-111.
80. Stacey, R. 2000. The emergence of knowledge in organization. Emergence, 2 (4): 23-39.
81. Stacey, R. 2001. Complex Responsive Processes in Organizations: Learning and Knowledge Creation. Routledge, London.
82. Stenmark, D. 2001. Leverage Tacit Organizational Knowledge. Journal of Management Information Systems, 17(3): 9-24.
83. Storey, J., & Barnett, E. 2000. Knowledge Management Initiatives: Learning From Failure. Journal of Knowledge Management, 4(2): 145-156.
84. Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. 1998. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (2nd Ed.). Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
85. Swap, W., Leonard, D., Shields, M., & Abrams, L. 2001. Using mentoring and storytelling to transfer knowledge in the workplace. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1): 95-114.
86. Szulanski, G. 1996. Exploring internal stickiness: impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter Special Issue): 27-43.
87. Szulanski, G. 2000. The process of knowledge transfer: a diachronic analysis of stickiness. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1): 9-27.
88. Thompson, M. P. A., & Walsham, G. 2004. Placing knowledge management in context. Journal of Management Studies, 41(5): 725-747.
89. Tsoukas, H. 1996. The firm as a distributed knowledge system: A constructionist approach. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter Special Issue): 11-25.
90. Tsoukas, H. 2003. Do we really understand tacit knowledge? In M. Easterby-Smith and M. A. Lyles (Eds.), Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge Management: 410-427. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford.
91. Tsoukas, H., & Vladimirou, E. 2001. What is organizational knowledge? Journal of Management Studies, 38(7): 973-993.
92. Tyre, M. J., & von Hippel, E. 1997. The situated nature of adaptive learning in organizations. Organization Science, 8(1): 71-83.
93. Van Maanen, J. 1979. The fact of fiction in organizational ethnography. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4): 539-550.
94. von Krogh, G. 1998. Care in knowledge creation. California Management Review, 40(3): 133-153.
95. Walsham, G. 2001. Knowledge management: the benefits and limitations of computer systems. European Management Journal, 19(6): 599-608.
96. Wasko, M. M., & Faraj, S. 2000. It is what one does: why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9: 155-173.
97. Weick, C. & Roberts, K. H. 1993. Collective mind in organizations: heedful interrelating on flight decks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38: 357-381.
98. Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of Oractice: Learning. Meaning, and Identity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
99. Yin, R. K. 1989. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Newbury Park, California: Sage.
100. Zack, M. H. 2000. If managing knowledge is thesolution, then what's the problem? In Y. Malhotra (Ed.), Knowledge Management and Business Model Innovation: 16-36. Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA.
電子全文 Fulltext
本電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。
論文使用權限 Thesis access permission:校內校外完全公開 unrestricted
開放時間 Available:
校內 Campus: 已公開 available
校外 Off-campus: 已公開 available


紙本論文 Printed copies
紙本論文的公開資訊在102學年度以後相對較為完整。如果需要查詢101學年度以前的紙本論文公開資訊,請聯繫圖資處紙本論文服務櫃台。如有不便之處敬請見諒。
開放時間 available 已公開 available

QR Code