Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Nonaka’s and Takeuchi’s SECI model is widely known and has achieved paradigmatic status. Perceived advantages of the model include: its appreciation of the dynamic nature of knowledge and knowledge creation. [5] it provides a framework for the management of the relevant processes. The model has also been much criticized at times. [7]
Gradually, CKOs became interested in practical and theoretical aspects of KM, and the new research field was formed. [9] The KM idea has been taken up by academics, such as Ikujiro Nonaka (Hitotsubashi University), Hirotaka Takeuchi (Hitotsubashi University), Thomas H. Davenport (Babson College) and Baruch Lev (New York University). [10] [11]
This model stresses the importance of both bonding and bridging networks (Wright 2007). In Nonaka and Takeuchi's SECI model of knowledge dimensions (see under knowledge management), knowledge can be tacit or explicit, with the interaction of the two resulting in new knowledge (Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995).
Ikujiro Nonaka proposed a model of knowledge creation that explains how tacit knowledge can be converted to explicit knowledge, both of which can be converted into organisational knowledge. [16] While introduced by Nonaka in 1990, [17] the model was further developed by Hirotaka Takeuchi and is thus known as the Nonaka–Takeuchi model.
Ikujiro Nonaka (野中 郁次郎, Nonaka Ikujirō, 10 May 1935 – 25 January 2025) was a Japanese organizational theorist and Professor at the Graduate School of International Corporate Strategy of the Hitotsubashi University, best known for his study of knowledge management.
Takeuchi's colleague Ikujiro Nonaka wrote an article The Knowledge-Creating Company in the Harvard Business Review, 1991. [12] It explored two types of knowledge, namely tacit knowledge which is that learned by experience and communicated indirectly, and explicit knowledge, which is that recorded in documentation, manuals and procedures.
All the three types of micro-level of creative knowledge work offer a highly contextualized understanding of how these workers operate in the knowledge economy. This approach is different from that taken by Zuboff (1988), Drucker (1993), Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) and Reich (2001) who sought to provide a more generic understanding (Loo, 2017).
The knowledge-based theory of the firm, or knowledge-based view (KBV), considers knowledge as an essentially important, scarce, and valuable resource in a firm. [1] [2] According to the knowledge-based theory of the firm, the possession of knowledge-based resources, known as intellectual capital, is essential in dynamic business environments. [3]