Modelling distributed knowledge processes in next generation multidisciplinary alliances

Proceedings - Academia/Industry Working Conference on Research Challenges 2000: Next Generation Enterprises: Virtual Organizations and Mobile/Pervasive Technologies, AIWORC 2000

Volumn , Issue , 2000, Pages 83-91

  Kanfer, A G ^a   Haythornthwaite, C ^a   Bowker, G C ^b   Bruce, B C ^a   Burbules, N ^a   Porac, J ^c   Wade, J ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c EMORY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY; COMPUTATIONAL SCIENCE; DISTRIBUTED COLLABORATION; DISTRIBUTED INTELLIGENCE; DISTRIBUTED KNOWLEDGE; KNOWLEDGE CREATIONS; MULTI-METHOD APPROACH; NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATIONS;

EID: 84962238897     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/AIWORC.2000.843277     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (48)

1. Badaracco, J. (1991). The knowledge link: How firms compete through strategic alliances. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
2. Bowker, G. C. 1993. 'How to be Universal: Some Cybernetic Strategies,' In Social Studies of Science, 23:107-127.
3. Bowker, G. C. & Star, S. L. (1999). Sorting Things Out: Classification and its Consequences, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4. Burt, R. S. 1992 Structural Holes, The Social structure of Competition, Harvard University Press.
5. Carley, K., & Wendt, K. (1991). Electronic mail and scientific communication. Knowledge, 12, 4, 406-440.
6. Chubin, D. E., Porter, A. L., Rossini, F. A., & Connolly, T. (Eds.) (1986) Interdisciplinary Analysis and Research. Mt. Airy, MD: Lomond Publications, Inc.
7. th-Century Life Scienees. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
8. Daft, R. L. & Lengel, R. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness, and structural design. Management Science, 32: 554-571.
9. Dede, C. (1996). The evolution of distance education: Emerging technologies and distributed learning. American Journal of Distance Education, 10(2), 4-36.
10. Duncker-Gassen, E. (1998). Multidisciplinary Research at the University of Twente. Enschede: Twente University Press.
11. Fujimura, J. H. (1998). Crafting science: A sociohistory of the quest for the genetics of cancer. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
12. Galegher, J. & Kraut, R. E. (1990). Technology for Intellectual Teamwork: Perspectives on Research and Design. In Intellectual teamwork: Social and technological foundations of cooperative work. Galegher, J., Kraut, R. E., Egido, C. (Eds.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
13. Galegher, J., Kraut, R. E., Egido, C. (Eds.). (1990). Intellectual teamwork: Social and technological foundations of cooperative work. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
14. Galison, P. (1997). Image and logic: A material culture of microphysics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15. Granovetter, M.S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360-1380.
16. Granovetter, M.S. (1982). The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited. In P.V. Marsden & N. Lin (Eds.), Social Structure and Network Analysis (pp. 105-130). Beverly Hills: Sage.
17. Gulati, R. (1998). Alliances and Networks. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 293-317.
18. Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 82-111.
19. Haythornthwaite, C. (Jan., 1999). Collaborative work networks among distributed learners, Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.
20. Haythornthwaite, C. (1996). Social network analysis: An approach and technique for the study of information exchange. Library and Information Science Research, 18, 323-342.
21. Haythornthwaite, C., & Wellman, B. (1998). Work, friendship, and media use for information exchange in a networked organization. Journal of the American Society for Information Science. In press.
22. Heims, Steve J.. The cybernetics group, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, c1991
23. Hesse B.W., Sproull, L.S., Kiesler, S.P. and Walsh, J.P. (1993). 'Returns to science: computer networks in oceanography', Communications of the ACM 36 (8): 90-101.
24. Judson, H. F. (1996). The eighth day of creation: makers of the revolution in biology/, Horace Freeland Judson. Expanded ed. Plainview, N.Y.: CSHL Press.
25. Kay, L. E. (1993) The molecular vision of life: Caltech, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the rise of the new biology. New York: Oxford University Press.
26. Keller, E. F. Refiguring life: metaphors of twentieth-century biology/, Evelyn Fox Keller. New York: Columbia University Press, c1995
27. Kogut, B. (1996). What firms do? Coordination, identity, and learning. Organizational Science, 7(5), 502-519.
28. Koschmann, T. (Ed.)(1996a) CSCL: Theory and Practice of an Emerging Paradigm. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
29. Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
30. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
31. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York, NY: Cambridge University.
32. Leonard-Barton, D. (1995). The Wellsprings of Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
33. McGrath, J.E. (1984). Groups, interaction and performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
34. McPherson, J. M. & Smith-Lovin, L. (1987). Homophily in voluntary organizations: Status, distance, and the composition of face-to-face groups. American Sociology Review, 52, 370-379.
35. Michaelson (a.k.a. Kanfer), A. G. (1993). The development of scientific speciality as diffusion through social relations: The case of role analysis. Social Networks, 15, 217-236.
36. Mullins, N. (1980). Social Networks among Biological Scientists. New York: Arno Press.
37. Pickering, A., ed. 1992. Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
38. Price, D. J. (1986). Little science, big science ... and beyond. New York: Free Press of Glencoe.
39. Reddy, M. J. (1979). The conduit metaphor - a case of frame conflict in our language about language. In Andrew Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 284-324). London, England: Cambridge University Press.
40. C. E. Shannon, "A mathematical theory of communication," Bell System Technical Journal, vol. 27, pp. 379-423 and 623-656, July and October, 1948.
41. Sproull, L. & Kiesler, S. 1991. Connections: New Ways of Working in the Networked Organization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
42. Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. (1989). Institutional Ecology, Translations, and Coherence: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-1939. Social Studies of Science, 19, 387-420.
43. Walsh J. & Bayma T. (1996) Computer netrworks and scientific work. Social studies of Science, 26, 661-703.
44. Walsh, J. Kucker, S, Maloney, N. & S. Gabbay, (1999). Connecting minds: CMC and scientific work. JASIS. Available online at http://www.uic.edu/~jwalsh/JASIS
45. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
46. W. Weaver & C. E. Shannon, (1949). The Mathematical Theory of Communication, Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, republished in paperback 1963.
47. Wenger, E., 1952-. Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity/, Etienne Wenger. Cambridge, U.K.; New York, N.Y.: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
48. Wittezaele, J. (1992). A la recherche de l'école de Palo Alto/, Jean-Jacques Wittezaele, Teresa García. Paris: Editions du Seuil.