Agric. Econ. - Czech, 2006, 52(6):289-300 | DOI: 10.17221/5026-AGRICECON

The significance of the personality of knowledge: its contribution in creating and utilizing the system of knowledge in organization

M. Polišenský
Czech University of Agriculture, Prague, Czech Republic

How does an organization utilize knowledge for the reproduction of its culture in innovations, it was a key-point of the question for an approach based on the methodology of social process in the recent past. Then the formation of knowledge was considered a process of power politics with the consequences for knowledge management. In the framework of those projects, attempts were made in organizations to extract the knowledge from experts and specialized professionals that it might be codified and saved in extensive databases; only then the remainder of employees ought to have possibility to consult them and add the results of their own ideas to these databases. Poor success of such attempts only illustrates the methodological failure of utilizing information technologies for knowledge formation, its storage and transfer. Moreover, when a new fact was soon discovered even in the framework of the new approach, that there was an abyss-like difference between information (that information technologies operate with) and the knowledge, then the significance of personality increased again. The research that was done with the "champions of organizational learning" in the framework of knowledge management emphasized their import in catching the best experience, knowledge codification and its distribution in the organizations. Among other qualities, the knowledge is strongly personalized: it means it is connected with personal experience, attitudes, and evaluations. On the other hand, an advantage of new methodology was that the possible social actions, connected with the knowledge management, search for a strategy, and implementation were studied. These very changes in methodology have been a valuable contribution even for the research into the role of personality within this social process, however. They induce circumstances and means for studying the infrastructure of relationships that make possible the impact of individual authority in organization in general. In this paper, we also pay attention to this social process in teams as compared to collectives and how team-leaders emerge within them.

Keywords: knowledge management, information technologies, personality of science, epistemic authority

Published: June 30, 2006  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Polišenský M. The significance of the personality of knowledge: its contribution in creating and utilizing the system of knowledge in organization. Agric. Econ. - Czech. 2006;52(6):289-300. doi: 10.17221/5026-AGRICECON.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Akli H., Sonnentag S. (2001): Knowledge Management in the Work Context: Development of an Instrument for Assessing Individual Knowledge Management. 10 th European Congress on Work and Organizational Psychology,"Globalization - opportunities and threats", Prague, Czech Rep., 16.-19. 5. Book of Abstracts, p. 46.
    2. Andriessen E., Poot J., Soekijad M. (2001): Knowledge Sharing in Distributed Communities. 10 th European Congress on Work and Organizational Psychology,"Globalization - opportunities and threats", Prague, Czech Republic, 16.-19. 5. Book of Abstracts, p. 40.
    3. Bales R.F. (1953): The Equilibrium Problem in Small Groups. In: Pardone T., Bales R.F., Shils E.A. (Eds): Working Papers in the Theory of Action.Glencoe, Ill., Free Press.
    4. Bell D. (1973, 1979): Postindustrial Society. Nachindustrielle Gesellschaft, Hamburg, Rowohlt, pp. 11-12.
    5. Boehme G., Stehr N. (eds.) (1986): The Knowledge Society. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dodrecht.
    6. Boyne W.J. (1995, 2001): Clash of Titans, World War II at Sea. Simon and Schuster, New York 1995; Srážka titánů. Námořní bitvy 2. světové války. Naše Vojsko, Praha 2001.
    7. Brown J.F.(1936): Psychology and the Social Order. McGraw-Hill Cook & Brown, New York: (1999) cit. dle Easterby-Smith M., Lyles M.A.(2003): The Blackwell Handbook of Organizational Knowledge Management. Blackwell Publ., Malden.
    8. Crockett W.H. (1955): Emergent Leadership in Small Decision-Making Groups. Journal Abnormal Social Psychology, 51: 378-383. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    9. Dachler P.(2001): Social Process Theorizing and Power in Methods of Knowledge Generation. 10th European Congress on Work and Organizational Psychology, Globalization - opportunities and threats. Prague, Czech Republic, 16.-19. 5. Book of Abstracts, p. 39.
    10. Dewey J. (1916): Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education. Collier-Macmillan, London.
    11. Easterby-Smith M., Lyles M.A. (2003): The Blackwell Handbook of Organizational Knowledge Management. Blackwell Publ., Malden.
    12. Forester R. (2001a): Behaviour and Outcome: An Exporation of the Linkages in a Team Setting. 10th European Congress on Work and Organizational Psychology, Globalization - opportunities and threats. Prague, Czech Republic, 16.-19. 5. Book of Abstracts, p. 14.
    13. Forester R. (2001b): Learning and Knowledge Transfer in Auotomotive Teams. 10th European Congress on Work and Organizational Psychology, Globalization - opportunities and threats. Prague, Czech Rep., 16.-19.5. 2001. Book of Abstracts, pp. 46-47.
    14. Friedrich, C.J. (1958): Authority, Reason, and Discretion. In: Friedrich C.J. (ed.): Authority.
    15. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 28- 48.
    16. Gardner H. (1997a): Extraordinary Minds. Basic Books, New York.
    17. Gardner H. (1997b): Six Afterthoughts: Comments on "Varieties of Intellectual Talent". Journal of Creative Behavior, 34 (2): 120-124. Go to original source...
    18. Geuss R. (2001): History and Illusion in Politics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
    19. Giddens A. (1998): Důsledky modernity. Sociologické nakladatelství, Praha.
    20. Gouldner A.W. (1979): The Future of Intellectuals and the Rise of the New Class. Oxford University Press, New York. Go to original source...
    21. Herbst S. (2003): Political authority in a mediated age. Theory and Society, 32: 481-503. Go to original source...
    22. Hermochová S. (1982): Sociálně psychologický výcvik. Příspěvek sociální psychologie k metodice práce s přirozenou skupinou (Social Psychological Training. A Contribution of Social Psychology for Methodology of Work with Natural Group). - Státní pedagogické nakladatelství, Praha: Univerzita Karlova.
    23. Iyengar S.,Valentino N.A. (2002): Who Says What? Source Credibility as a Mediator of Campaign Advertising. In: Lupia A., McCubbins M., Popkin S. (eds.): Elements of Reason: Cognition, Choice and the Bounds of Rationality. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
    24. Jenkins W.O. (1947): A review of leadership studies with particular reference to military problems. Psychology Bulletin, 44: 54-87. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    25. Katz D., Maccoby N., Gurin G., Floor L.G. (1951): Productivity, Suprevision, and Morale among Railroad Workers. Survay Research Center, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
    26. Kobylka J. (2005): Personal communication by chief of the consulting firm aPs. PhDr. Jan Kobylka, K Havlínu 15, Praha 5-Zbraslav, 24. 6.
    27. Konrad E. (2001): Knowledge Creation Processes in Organization. 10 th European Congress on Work and Organizational Psychology, Globalization - opportunities and threats. Prague, Czech Republic, 16.-19. 5. Book of Abstracts, p. 41.
    28. Krech D., Crutchfield R.S., Ballachey E. (1962, 1968): Individual in Society. Mc Graw-Hill, New York 1962; Človek v spoločnosti.: Vydavaťelstvo Slovenskej Akadémie vied, Bratislava 1968.
    29. Lazarsfeld, P.F., Merton R.K. (1948): Mass Communication, Popular Taste and Organized Social Action. In: Bryson L. (ed.): The Communication of Ideas. Harper and Brother, New York, pp. 101-102.
    30. Lionberger H.F. (1953): Some characteristics of farm operators sought as sources of farm information in a Missouri community. Rural Sociology, 18: 327-338.
    31. Marsh C.P., Coleman A.L. (1954): Farmers practice adoption rates in relation to adoption rates of leaders. Rural Sociology, 19: 180-183.
    32. McDermott R. (1998): Why information technology inspired but cannot deliver knowledge management. California Management Review, 41 (4): 103-117. Go to original source...
    33. Ouchi W.G. (1981): Theory Z. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass.
    34. Pascale R., Athos A. (1981): The Art of Japaneese Management. Simon and Schuster, New York. Go to original source...
    35. Pechačová Z, Rymešová P., Michálek P. (2002): Studijní texty z psychologie pro studenty ČZU (Educational Texts on Psychology for Students). Česká zemědělská univerzita, PEF, Praha.
    36. Peters T., Waterman R. (1982): In Search of Excellence. Harper & Row, New York.
    37. Peters T., Austin N. (1985): A Passion for Excellence. Collins, Glasgow.
    38. Petty R., Cacioppo J. (1981): Attitudes and Persuation: Classic and Contemporary Approaches. W.C. Brown, Dubuque: IA.
    39. Polišenský M. (1996): Špatně definované problémy a jejich využití ve výuce z pozice humanistické psychologie (Ill-Defined problems and thein application in teaching on the position of humanistic psychology). Sborník prací z vědecké konference Agrární perspektivy V. Vzdělávání pro XXI. století. Česká zemědělská univerzita, PEF, Praha 3.-4. 9. E/K-I-1996, pp. 494-497.
    40. Polišenský M. (1997): Studium vědeckých pojmů v díle Anaximandra z Milétu z hlediska psychologie myšlení a teorie množin (Study of Scientific Concepts in the Work of Anaximander of Miletus from the viewpoint of Psychology of Thought and Set Theory). Kandidátská práce (Candidate Disertation) Filosofická fakulta Karlovy university. Autoreferát disertace k získání vědecké hodnosti kandidáta psychologických věd, 77-01-9, Univerzita Karlova, Praha.
    41. Polisensky M. (2003): Multilaterality, Specialization, and Personality Development in Organizations. 11 th European Congress on Work and Organizational Psychology, "Identity and Diversity in Organizations. Building Bridges in Europe". Lisboa-Portugal, 14.-17. 5. Book of Abstracts, poster P19/422.
    42. Polišenský M. (2004a) Změny poslání a cílů organizací v pseudo-konkurenčním prostředí (Mission and Goal Changes in Organizations within the Pseudo-Competitive Environment). Sborník z mezinárodní vědecké konference "Firma a konkurenční prostředí. Sekce 3: Management v konkurenčním prostředí", Mendelova zemědělská a lesnická univerzita v Brně, PEF, Brno 7.-8. 3., pp. 324-338.
    43. Polisensky M. (2004b): The Main Cause of Significantly Low Numbers of Patent Applications by Residents in CR and Some Other Countries of the Former Eastern Block. International Conference "European Integration Local and Global Consequences". Sept. 15-19, Brno, Czech Rep., Konference Proceedings CD; ISBN 80-7157-826-6.
    44. Spaltro E. (2001): Membership and Leadership. 10th European Congress on Work and Organizational Psychology, Globalization - opportunities and threats. Prague, Czech Rep., 16.-19. 5. Book of Abstracts, p. 94.
    45. Sonnentag S. (2001): Learning motivation and learning goal orientation in information technology business. The 10 th European Congress on Work and Organizational Psychology "Globalization - opportunities and threats. Prague 16.-19. 5., Czech Republic. Book of Abstracts, p. 44.
    46. Soro G., Acquadro M.D., Grassi F. (2001a): Multidimensional Leadership Throughout Presence and Context. 10th European Congress on Work and Organizational Psychology, Globalization - opportunities and threats. Prague, Czech Rep., 16.-19.5. Book of Abstracts, p. 92.
    47. Vorwerg M. (1971): Sozialpsychologisches Training. Friedrich Schiller-Universitaet, Jena.
    48. Vygotski L.S. (1956, 1970): Myšlenije i reč (Thouht and Speech). In: Vygotskij L.S.: Izbrannyje psichologičeskije isledovanija. Izdatělstvo Akademii, Nauk, Moskva 1956; Myšlení a řeč, Státní pedagogické nakladatelství, Praha 1970.
    49. Wilkening E.A. (1952): Informal leaders and innovators in farm practices. Rural Sociology, 17: 272-275.
    50. Whyte W.F.(1948): Human Relations in the Restaurant Industry. McGraw-Hill, New York.

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content