Breaking down the boundaries: Interdisciplinarity and the future of KM

14th Americas Conference on Information Systems, AMCIS 2008

Volumn 3, Issue , 2008, Pages 1632-1639

  Jones, Rachel ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WAIKATO   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Boundary objects; Interdisciplinarity; Knowledge management

Indexed keywords

BOUNDARY OBJECTS; INTERDISCIPLINARITY; MULTI-DISCIPLINARY APPROACH; PROCESS THEORY;

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT;

INFORMATION SYSTEMS;

EID: 84870351969     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (23)

1. Bechky, B. (2003) Sharing meaning across occupational communities: The transformation of understanding on a production floor, Organization Science, 14, 3, 312-330.
2. Bélanger, F. and Allport, C. D. (2008) Collaborative technologies in knowledge telework: an exploratory study, Information Systems Journal, 18, 1, 101-121.
3. Carlile, P. R. (2002) A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: Boundary objects in new product development, Organization Science, 13, 4, 442-455.
4. Child, J. T. and Shumate, M. (2007) The impact of communal knowledge repositories and people-based knowledge management on perceptions of team effectiveness, Management Communication Quarterly, 21, 1, 29-40, 43-54.
5. Dalkir, K. (2005) Knowledge management in theory and practice, Elsevier, Oxford.
6. Gordon, R. and Grant, D. (2005) Knowledge management or management of knowledge? Why people interested in knowledge management need to consider Foucault and the construct of power, Tamara: Journal of Critical Postmodern Organization Science, 3, 2, 27-38.
7. Grossman, M. (2007) The emerging academic discipline of knowledge management, Journal of Information Systems Education, 18, 1, 31-37.
8. Hazlett, S. A., McAdam, R. and Gallagher, S. (2007) Theory building in knowledge management: In search of paradigms, Journal of Management Inquiry, 14, 1, 31-42.
9. Koskinen, K. (2005) Metaphoric boundary objects as co-ordinating mechanisms in the knowledge sharing of innovation processes, European Journal of Innovation Management, 8, 3, 323-325.
10. thInformation Systems Research Seminar in Scandinavia IRIS 2007, 1-18.
11. Leggon, C. B. (2006) Traditional academic disciplines: Obstacles or opportunities to the conduct of research and inquiry, Retrieved 13 February, 2008, from www.tpac.gatech.edu/nsfworkshop/essays/Leggon.doc
12. Luoma, J., Hämäläinen, R. P. and Saarinen, E. (2007) Coping with Complexity: Systems Thinking, Complex Responsive Processes, and Systems Intelligence, Working Paper, 28 September 2007, Systems Analysis Laboratory, Helsinki University of Technology.
13. Miller, R. (2005) Creating boundary objects to aid knowledge transfer, Knowledge Management Review, 8, 2, 12-15.
14. Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995) The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation, Oxford University Press, New York.
15. Payne, S. L. (1999) Interdisciplinarity: Potentials and challenges, Systemic Practice and Action Research, 12, 2, 173-182.
16. Ponzi, L. J. and Koenig, M. (2002) Knowledge management: another management fad? Information Research, 8, 1, paper no. 145.
17. Stacey, R. D. (2001) Complex responsive processes in organizations, Routledge, London.
18. Stacey, R. (2003) Learning as an activity of interdependent people, The Learning Organization, 10, 6, 325-331.
19. Stankosky, M. (2005) Advances in knowledge management: University research toward an academic discipline, in Michael Stankosky (Ed.), Creating the Discipline of Knowledge Management: The Latest in University Research, Burlington, MA, Elsevier Butterworth Heinemann, 11-14.
20. Star, S. and Griesemer, J. (1989) Institutional ecology, "translations" and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39, Social Studies of Science, 19, 3, 387-420.
21. Suchman A. L. (2006) A new theoretical foundation for relationship-centered care: complex responsive processes of relating, Journal of General Internal Medicine, 21, S40-S44.
22. Wilson, G. and Herndl, C. (2007) Boundary objects as rhetorical exigence: Knowledge mapping and interdisciplinary cooperation at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 21, 2, 129-154.
23. Wilson, T. D. (2002) The nonsense of 'knowledge management', Retrieved 28 May, 2007, from http://information.net/ir/8-1/paper144.html.