Unboxing knowledge in collaboration between academia and society: A story about conceptions and epistemic uncertainty

Author:

Jonsson Anna12,Grafström Maria2,Klintman Mikael3

Affiliation:

1. Department of Business Administration, School of Economics & Management, Lund University , Lund SE- 220 07, Sweden

2. Stockholm Centre for Organizational Research (SCORE), Stockholm School of Economics and Stockholm University , Stockholm SE-106 91, Sweden

3. Department of Sociology, Lund University , P.O Box 114, Lund SE-221 00, Sweden

Abstract

Abstract Policymakers increasingly emphasize knowledge collaboration between academia and society as important means to generate innovations and solve complex issues. However, while recent literature on such collaboration suggests that knowledge needs to be integrated and generated across disciplines and sectors, there are surprisingly few studies that define what is meant by ‘knowledge’ or focus on the process of generating knowledge. Subsequently, the aim of this paper is to unbox ‘knowledge’ in knowledge collaboration by focusing specifically on how knowledge is understood by heterogenous actors during the process of generating knowledge. We build on insights from an in-depth case study and contribute to the literature on knowledge collaboration by bringing in theory on boundary work that specifically addresses the knowledge generation process. We argue that to better meet the expectations of collaboration, there is a need for more discussions and focus on the participating stakeholders’ heterogenous epistemological as well as ontological understanding.

Funder

Riksbankens Jubileumsfond

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law,Public Administration,Geography, Planning and Development

Reference83 articles.

1. De-essentializing the Knowledge Intensive Firm: Reflections on Skeptical Research Going against the Mainstream;Alvesson;Journal of Management Studies,2011

2. Critical Theory and Postmodernism Approaches to Organizational Studies

3. Has Management Studies Lost Its Way?;Alvesson;Journal of Management Studies,2013

4. Reflexive methodology: New vistas for qualitative research;Alvesson;3rd edn. London: Sage,2018

Cited by 5 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Embracing the academic–practice gap: Knowledge collaboration and the role of institutional knotting;Management Learning;2023-12-27

2. Training researchers and planning science communication and dissemination activities: testing the QUEST model in practice and theory;Issue 06, 2023. Special Issue: Science communication in higher education: global perspectives on the teaching of science communication;2023-12-11

3. Organising for collaboration with schools: experiences from six Swedish universities;Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research;2023-10-18

4. Collaboration between researchers and practitioners in environmental assessment: Introduction to the special issue;Environmental Impact Assessment Review;2023-05

5. Communicating science through competing logics and a science-art lens;Journal of Science Communication;2022-11-28

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3