Search results

The purpose of this paper is to challenge processes of organizational learning and innovation that are based on making use of, extrapolating, or adapting past experiences and knowledge, because such a strategy turns out to be incapable of dealing with the challenges of today’s volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous environment. As a possible way out, a conceptual model is proposed that integrates organizational learning and innovation as a future-driven learning process and a future-making practice.

This work is conceptual in nature, drawing on (both theoretical/philosophical and empirical) interdisciplinary concepts and evidence from a variety of fields, including organizational studies, organizational learning, innovation studies, systems theory and systems biology, as well as cognitive science.

The author proposes a paradigm shift in organizational learning: from a future-oriented perspective, organizational learning can be viewed as an innovation process that is based on “learning from the future as it emerges.” A conceptual approach is presented that integrates future-oriented innovation and organizational learning as a future-making practice. It is based on learning from future potentials as a source for sustainable innovations. Both epistemological/ontological foundations and organizational implications are discussed.

This paper introduces a new perspective on the role of future-oriented innovation in the context of organizational learning. It shows how organizational learning and innovation can be integrated and how shortcomings of absorptive capacity can be overcome by assuming a future-driven perspective. Furthermore, an epistemology of future knowledge/potentials and its applications for organizations is developed.

While many approaches in the field of unlearning aim at describing, understanding or explaining the “what” and/or “how” of unlearning, this paper aims to focus on the “where-to” and the goal of unlearning. In many cases, unlearning starts off with a specific result or goal in mind. This paper suggests that such an approach has to be challenged in the context of a highly complex and uncertain world and to introduce a mode of unlearning following a strategy of future-oriented open-endedness.

This conceptual paper draws on (both theoretical/philosophical and empirical) interdisciplinary evidence from a wide variety of fields, such as organization studies, organizational (un)learning, systems theory, cognitive science and innovation studies.

It turns out that open-endedness in unlearning processes plays a central role, especially if we are confronted with high levels of uncertainty and complexity. In such an environment, following a strategy of co-becoming with an unfolding environment and with an emergent goal seems to be more promising than aiming at a preconceived (un-)learning goal.

The unlearning literature provides various approaches to what unlearning is and how it can be executed. However, understanding the actual goals and outcomes of unlearning and how these goals are identified and determined is a rather under-researched field. In many cases, they are preconceived in advance finding their realization in new forms of knowledge, assumptions, belief systems, values or routines. This paper challenges this strategy and addresses the gap of how it is possible to unlearn toward an uncertain future. This has an impact on the process of unlearning itself; it has to be reframed and understood as an open-ended strategy for identifying emerging future potentials, purposes and goals in a process of co-becoming with an unfolding future.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the concept of self-transcending knowledge as one of P. Senge’s common themes underpinning his five disciplines approach. It will be shown that the notions of vision, purpose and transcendence, especially self-transcendence are closely related to each other. However, the aspect of self-transcendence has not been covered well yet in the existing literature. That is why this paper is guided by the following research question: What does a consolidated, integrative and interdisciplinary concept of self-transcending knowledge look like, and what are its defining and unifying features and characteristics with respect to learning organizations?

This conceptual paper draws on (both theoretical and empirical) interdisciplinary evidence from a wide variety of fields, such as organization studies, psychology, philosophy, learning organizations, cognitive science and innovation studies. Key authors from the field of self-transcending knowledge and their approaches will be discussed to develop a unified interdisciplinary concept of self-transcending knowledge and its possible applications, which will be demonstrated in a case study.

Self-transcending knowledge turns out to be central in the fields of learning (organizations) and innovation, as it deals with future-oriented knowledge that is “not yet”, that transcends the boundaries of existing knowledge. It is based on self-detachment, the notion of potentials and the insight that novel knowledge is not only the result of a creative agent (or organization) but also can be found and cocreated through an attentive search in an unfolding reality.

Existing literature in the field of P. Senge’s five disciplines (and beyond) does not offer a comprehensive concept of self-transcending knowledge. This paper addresses this issue by bringing together approaches from a wide range of fields related to this concept; it develops an interdisciplinary and coherent notion and taxonomy of self-transcending knowledge and shows its impact for learning organizations and innovation.

Empowerment describes the processes of how to gain and increase autonomy and self‐determination in one's own environment. Typical examples for empowerment processes can be found in: citizen's initiatives, human rights movements, and other social movements or self help groups. This paper shows that empowerment processes have to be understood as “knowledge processes”. A link between empowerment and the methods of knowledge management will be established. It is inspired by Heinz von Foersters ideas of self‐regulated processes in nervous systems.

In a first step the concept of empowerment will be presented. Secondly, it will be shown which role knowledge is playing in this context. In the last part practical implications of these considerations will be discussed.

The motivation for engaging in civil society issues is heavily dependent on personal knowledge and on the abilities to access knowledge resources. A constructivist paradigm turns out to be fertile. Discovering one's own strengths, constructing solutions, testing them in the personal context and environment, as well as reflecting these processes are the starting points for developing a constructivist perspective on empowerment processes.

Coaching empowerment processes in a knowledge‐oriented framework can focus on the construction of personal strength, can create space for experimental action and also for reflecting on social and political processes. This provides opportunities for exchange of experiences and fosters second‐order views.

H.v.Foerster's concepts on change and autonomy are the foundation for this constructivist approach to empowerment. This could be a helpful approach for supporting affected people in every empowerment process.

This paper aims to review the latest management developments across the globe and pinpoint practical implications from cutting-edge research and case studies.

This briefing is prepared by an independent writer who adds their own impartial comments and places the articles in context.

Companies today operate within a highly uncertain business environment that can impact on the effectiveness of organizational learning. A focus on open-ended unlearning is potentially a suitable alternative approach which is based on the assumption that the future cannot be predicted but might be co-created with the firm's environment to some extent.

The briefing saves busy executives and researchers hours of reading time by selecting only the very best, most pertinent information and presenting it in a condensed and easy-to-digest format.

This paper aims to present a conceptual framework of four knowledge co-creation processes in enterprise social media (ESM). From an interactionist perspective, the paper proposes a model on the role of ESM and enterprise social networks (ESNs) in facilitating knowledge co-creation processes.

This conceptual paper revisits existing literature on ESM, ESNs and social knowledge management to propose, hypothetically, the relationship between ESM, ESN and knowledge co-creation processes.

ESM enhances employee-to-employee interaction, which allows employees to co-create knowledge in a social context. Firstly, ESM affords employees to create ESNs for knowledge co-creation. Secondly, the structure of employee-to-employee interaction in ESNs will influence knowledge co-creation processes. Thirdly, ESNs provide the mechanism through which ESM affordances enable or constrain knowledge co-creation in the organisation.

ESM creates a social context that allows employees to share, apply and recreate or reproduce knowledge in the process of knowledge co-creation. The action possibilities of ESM perceived and actualised by employees will enable or constrain knowledge co-creation. Such influences are fuelled by the structural properties of employee relationships on ESM.

The paper elucidates the concept of knowledge co-creation based on a representation of user activities in ESM. This paper suggests that knowledge co-creation is a salient outcome of both individual-to-individual interactions on ESM and individual-to-ESM interactions enabled by ESM affordances.

The paper serves as an introduction to the special issue on Heinz von Foerster. Major episodes of his life are sketched and related to his scientific convictions regarding transdisciplinary research and radical constructivist. In the second part the contributions to the issue are summarized. Finally, the relevance of Foerster's work is discussed.

The arguments are based on the scientific literature.

Foerster argued against reductionist science and in favor of transdisciplinary research in order to trigger further scientific developments.

By using transdiciplinary and choosing the constructivist perspective, science will increase its productivity. This should be reflected in science policy.

By pointing at the variety of his scientific output and his influence on many colleagues and students, the paper is in support of Foerster's non‐reductionist worldview.