SECI知识转化模型中的“薛定谔猫悖论”及其理论阐释被引量：17

Study on Schroumldinger's Cat in SECI Model and Its Theoretical Explanation

导出

摘要在野中郁次郎(Nonaka)等的SECI知识转化模型中,同一种知识在转化前是隐性的,在转化后又突然变成显性的,从而产生了类似物理学中"薛定谔猫"般的悖论。这种悖论其实反映了,既有的隐性知识界定的静态维度与知识转化动态过程之间的矛盾。与以往研究不同的是本文从动态性和不确定性的角度来区分隐性知识和显性知识,认为知识转化过程其实是一个知识"量子跃迁"的动态过程,而不是通常所认为的连续函数的过程。在这个过程中,动态的隐性知识不能和静态的显性知识直接对接,而是要按照隐性知识转化的三个阶段,逐步降低自身的动态性和不确定性,通过"双重剥离"和"双重近似",以最终达到知识转化的目的和效果。相应地,SECI模型除了外在的知识"螺旋"创造过程以外,还有一个"内螺旋"的创造过程。遵照这个"双螺旋"的原理和过程,组织就能更好地进行知识创新的实践。 In the model of SECI put forward by Nonaka, the tacit knowledge is always entangled with explicit knowledge in the process of knowledge conversion, which leads to the concept self-contradiction called Schroumldinger＇s cat. The paradox embodies the contradiction between current static dimensions of tacit knowledge＇s definition with the dynamic process of knowledge transform. Different from former researches, the paper distinguishes between tacit and explicit knowledge from the perspectives of dynamic and uncertainty characters in the process of knowledge transfer. The dynamic process is a quantum-jump process rather than the normal form of continuous function. In the process, dynamic tacit knowledge can＇t connect with explicit knowledge directly. In order to complete its transfer, tacit knowledge should reduce its dynamic and uncertainty characters according to three phases of tacit knowledge transfer and realize ＂double separate＂ and ＂double similar＂. Accordingly, there is an interior spiral of knowledge creation besides exterior spiral. The theory and process of two spirals in knowledge creation can help organizations practice knowledge creation.

作者邵昶丁栋虹

机构地区复旦大学管理学院

出处《中国工业经济》 CSSCI 北大核心 2009年第2期87-97,共11页 China Industrial Economics

基金上海市社会科学规划课题"基于创业能力增强的企业家隐性知识学习机理研究"(批准号2007BJB008)。

关键词 SECI模型 “薛定谔猫悖论” 隐性知识知识转化 ＂SECI＂ model Schroumldinger＇s cat tacit knowledge knowledge transfer

分类号 F270 [经济管理—企业管理]

引文网络
相关文献

参考文献32

1Anssi, S. Social Network Structures for Explicit, Tacit and Potential Knowledge [J]. International Journal of Knowledge Management,2009,5 ( 1 ).
2Birkinshaw, J., Nobel, R. and Ridderstrale, J. Knowledge As a Contingency Variable: Do the Characteristics of Knowledge Predict Organization Structure[J]. Organization Science,2002,13 (3).
3Brown, J. S. and Duguid, P. Knowledge and Organization: A Social-practice Perspective [J]. Organization Science, 2001,12(2).
4Chilton, M. A., Bloodgood, J.M. The Dimensions of Tacit & Explicit Knowledge: A Description and Measure [J]. International Journal of Knowledge Management,2008,4(2).
5Cianciolo, A. T., Grigorenkoc, E.L., Jarvin, L., Sternberg, R.J. Practical Intelligence and Tacit Knowledge: Advancements in the Measurement of Developing Expertise[J]. Learning and Individual Differences,2006, (16).
6Erden, Z., Krogh, G.V. and Nonaka, I. The Quality of Group Tacit Knowledge [J]. Journal of Strategic Information Systems,2008, (17).
7Gibson, C. B, and Earley, P. C. Collective Cognition in Action: Accumulation, Interaction, Examination, and Accommodation in the Development and Operation of Group Efficacy Beliefs in the Workplace [J]. Academy of Management Review,2007,32(2).
8Haas, M.R.,and Hansen, M. T. Different Knowledge, Different Benefits: Toward a Productivity Perspective on Knowledge Sharing in Organizations[J]. Strategic Management Journal,2007, (28).
9Hargadon,A.,and Fanelli,A. Action and Possibility: Reconciling Dual Perspectives of Knowledge in Organizations [J]. Organization Science, 2002,13(3).
10Hazel, T. Tacit Knowledge: Conceptualization and Operationalizations [J]. International Journal of Knowledge Management, 2007,3 (3).