On the metaphorical nature of intellectual capital: a textual analysis

Abstract

Metaphors are at the basis of our understanding of reality. Using the theory of metaphor developed by Lakoff and Johnson (1980, 1999) this paper analyses common metaphors used in the intellectual capital and knowledge management literatures. An analysis of key works by Davenport & Prusak (2000), Nonaka &Takeuchi (1995), andStewart (1991) suggests that at least 95 percent of all statements about either knowledge or intellectual capital are based on metaphors. The paper analyses the two metaphors that form the basis for the concept of intellectual capital: 'Knowledge as a Resource' and 'Knowledge as Capital', both of which derive their foundations from the industrial age. The paper goes into some of the implications of these findings for the theory and practice of intellectual capital. Common metaphors used in conceptualising abstract phenomena in traditional management practices unconsciously reinforce the established social order. The paper concludes by asking whether we need new metaphors to better understand the mechanisms of the knowledge economy, hence allowing us to potentially change some of the more negative structural features of contemporary society.

Knowledge strategies aiming to improve the intellectual capital of universities

“…By the end of the second stage, we reached the conclusion that the major limitations of these frameworks come from extending the attributes of linearity and tangibility from the realm of tangible assets to the realm of knowledge fields and intellectual capital. The roots of these limitations can be found in the metaphors (Andriessen, 2006;Lakoff and Johnson, 1999) used for explaining the concept of knowledge and intellectual capital and in the inertial thinking of many researchers. A phenomenon associated to these limitations has been coined "accountingisation" by Dumay (2009).…”

“…In the first stage of development of IC, the focus was on defining IC and its role within organizations by contrasting its nature with the classical economic capital, based on tangible objects and financial resources (Andriessen, 2004(Andriessen, , 2006MERITUM, 2002;Ricceri, 2008;Roos et al, 2005). In an inspirational synthesis, Petty and Guthrie (2000, p. 156) conclude: "The aim of stage one was to render the invisible visible by creating a discourse that all could engage in.…”

“…The fact that energy is a field and there are several forms of energy (i.e., mechanical, thermal, electrical, nuclear etc.) can be mapped from the source domain into the target domain (Andriessen, 2006;Lakoff and Johnson, 1999), to postulate that knowledge can be conceived as a field, and we may postulate several forms of knowledge: rational, emotional, and spiritual. Rational knowledge results from processing data and information using our rationality.…”

Knowledge Sharing is Knowledge Creation: An Intervention Study of Metaphors for Knowledge

“…The two approaches in generations 1 and 2 have been analyzed from a metaphor perspective by Andriessen (2006). He finds that two very different metaphorical concepts are at play with regards to knowledge in the theories by Nonaka and Takeuchi on the one hand and Prusak and Davenport on the other.…”

Making Sense of Knowledge Productivity

“…Future research could focus on the discovery of better metaphors for phenomena such as knowledge productivity, knowledge management and intellectual capital. This research could build on the work by Andriessen & Van den Boom (Andriessen, 2006;Andriessen & Van den Boom, 2007, 2009). Fourth, in our research we also experienced the importance of aligning knowledge management initiatives with corporate epistemology (Venzin, Krogh, & Roos, 1998).…”