Communication knowledge for knowledge communication

You can’t shake hands with clenched fists: potential effects of trust assessments on the adoption of e-negotiation services

“…For example, a professional negotiator (e.g., a union representative) interacting with an e-negotiation system is expected to have lower trust in the system than a layman would have, because he or she have higher standards of expectations. Trust in an information system is also increased if users try to conduct a task on their own and fail (Waern et al 1992), and when the interaction with the computer is error-free (Lee and Moray 1992). This again, is relevant for e-negotiations, as service providers may provide an error free environment for negotiations, and let users try to directly negotiate a deal before using the system's facilities.…”

Enrollment Logics and Discourses: Toward Developing an Enrollment Knowledge Framework

“…Externalization processes involve converting enrollment knowledge into enrollment information. Waern and colleagues () note that “knowledge should be understood as information which can be used instrumentally in the pursuit of given goals” (p. 214). Information and knowledge are often treated interchangeably until tacit knowledge is externalized into explicit forms (e.g., enrollment reports).…”

“…Communication knowledge is meta‐knowledge that facilitates the meaning making that occurs between chief enrollment officers and those in their constituent organization, organizational field, and professional communities. Communication knowledge is composed of three types of knowledge: discourse knowledge , mediating knowledge , and domain‐related knowledge (Waern et al ).…”

“…Enrollment discourse knowledge involves timing, tailoring, and clarifying enrollment discursive output to reach a target audience. Additionally, enrollment discourse knowledge involves constructing an enrollment representation of interactional performances that “provide the participants in the communication with the ability to refer back to previous events, previously mentioned items, their interrelationships and the intentions behind the interactions” (Waern et al , pp. 219–220).…”

“…Enrollment mediating knowledge ensures enrollment‐related cohesion and thus is used “to decide under what circumstances, to whom and what way a particular kind of [enrollment] knowledge element and [enrollment] knowledge relationship should be presented” (Waern et al , p. 224). Chief enrollment officers are data and information sentries—allowing entry, translating, and filtering—deciding from whom they will accept enrollment‐related input, what and how much of that input will be received and distributed, the form the input will take, and when the flow of enrollment data or information must stop (Ancona and Caldwell , p. 477).…”