Knowledge management (KM) or knowledge sharing in organizations is based on an understanding of knowledge creation and knowledge transfer. In implementation, KM is an effort to benefit from the knowledge that resides in an organization by using it to achieve the organization's mission. The transfer of tacit or implicit knowledge to explicit and accessible formats, the goal of many KM projects, is challenging, controversial, and endowed with ongoing management issues. This article argues that effective knowledge management in many disciplinary contexts must be based on understanding the dynamic nature of knowledge itself. The article critiques some current thinking in the KM literature and concludes with a view towards knowledge management programs built around knowledge as a dynamic process.

Improving health care delivery is a pressing societal goal, and information scientists have a role in effecting change. Information science research has led to understanding theories and practices of information use within the informing professions, but information science and one of its subspecialties, Knowledge Management (KM), also have the potential to influence and enhance other professional disciplines. This concept paper makes the argument that KM is a beneficial framework to help health care clinicians manage their practices and ultimately administer quality care to their patients. The central argument is predicated on the assumption that medicine is a knowledge-based profession and that finding, sharing, and developing clinicians' knowledge is necessary for effective primary health care practice. The authors make the case that in an environment of a burgeoning body of health care research and the adoption of technology tools, physicians can benefit from understanding effective KM practice. The model as presented here borrows from recent information science scholarship in KM and is intended to inform intervention protocols for effective KM to improve quality of care.

Abstract:This article reports on a study of how scientific knowledge about genetically modified (GM) food flows to the American public, focusing on language and message genres in the scientific literature, newspapers, and popular magazines. A comprehensive search of these literatures from 1992 to 2002 revealed a publishing pattern of scientific communication that contrasted with that found in the lay press. Examination of this difference led researchers to a scientific study on the effect of GM corn pollen on the Monarch butterfly. The case study of the discourse surrounding this event demonstrates how press releases affect what is published in the popular press. The role of this event in generating subtle repercussions in the perceptions of U.S. consumers, similar to the ripple effects found in Kasperson's social amplification of risk theory, is analyzed and reported.

No abstract

No abstract