Learning from complex and heterogeneous experiences: the role of knowledge codification

Abstract

International audienceThe purpose of this paper is to study organizational learning from complex and heterogeneous experiences. According to March (2010), this kind of high intellect learning is difficult to accomplish because it requires deliberate investments in knowledge transfer and creation. Zollo and Winter (2002) emphasized how knowledge codification can facilitate this process, as long as it is “well-performed”. However, knowledge management scholars have yet to explore what is meant by well-performed codification and how to achieve it.This paper addresses this gap and provides a conceptual analysis based on two related but previously disconnected research areas: organizational learning and knowledge management.This paper contributes to the literature in three ways. First, a new understanding of different types of experiences and their effects on learning is proposed. Then the codification process using a critical realist paradigm to overcome the epistemological boundaries of knowledge versus knowing is discussed; in doing so, it is shown that codification can take different forms to be “well-performed”. Finally, appropriate codification strategies based on experience type are identified.The abstraction-oriented codification outlined in this paper runs counter to the logic of concrete codification that dominates both theory and practice. Thus, going beyond the traditional debate on the degree of codification (i.e. should knowledge be fully codified or just partly codified), this paper introduced a new debate about the appropriate degree of abstraction

Acquisition integration flexibility: toward a conceptual framework

“…In other words, firms with too narrow experience may display lower performance in subsequent acquisitions. Simply, this ability is more likely in organizations with relevant experience in acquisition integration, as experienced acquirers can extract, accumulate, and create knowledge (Echajari and Thomas, 2015). Thus, we propose:…”

The merits of playing it by the book: routine versus deliberate learning and the development of dynamic capabilities

“…Second, organizational learning theorists emphasize the conflict between the incremental development of routines and the idea of deliberately driven learning mechanisms (Echajari and Thomas, 2015). Zollo and Winter (2002) argue that the articulation of rules, codification of knowledge, and other processes of deliberately capturing experiences are essential, yet underappreciated activities in developing dynamic capabilities.…”

“…First, we contribute to the debate on the nature of routines within the dynamic capabilities view. One camp advocates that learning is a routine-based construct; the other camp emphasizes deliberate learning as the primary source of adaptation (Echajari and Thomas, 2015). We develop both perspectives by looking at different managerial practices that expose the mechanisms of routine and deliberate learning.…”

EO Model for Tacit Knowledge Externalization in Socio-Technical Enterprises

“…However, there have been no attempts for the uniform representation of the externalization process (Echajari & Thomas, 2015) by integrating the diverse aspects. This has resulted in divergent and contradictory representation of externalization in the literature (Munoz et al, 2015;Venkitachalam & Busch, 2012).…”

“…Although researchers have explored diverse aspects of externalization individually, there have been no attempts for its comprehensive integration (Echajari & Thomas, 2015). This lacuna has resulted in a divergent and contradictory representation of the externalization process (Munoz, Mosey, & Binks, 2015;Venkitachalam & Busch, 2012).…”