Since 2000, all Dutch Universities of Professional Education are confronted with three major renewals. The first was the European agreement to implement the Bachelor-Master system in Higher Education. The second was the strong tendence to renew eduction towards Competence Based Education. The third renewal came from the decision of the ministery of Education to contract lectures (lectoren) and research networks (kenniskringen) to improve research competences among students. Basic idea behind the latest renewal was that if students from Universities of Professional Education bring in more knowledge in companies, during and after their study, this will stimulate the innovative power of Dutch small and medium enterprices (SME’s). Educational developers have been very bussy with these renewals. Under the cloak of national assurance guidelines and external panels of inspection many educational developers automatically tended to use the instrumental paradigm for many design contexts. In accordance with the research of Gustafson (1993) and Richey (1993) we raised questions about the relevance of the instrumental paradigm for educational design contexts, because often the means-end thinking of the instrumental approach have seemed to be out of place. This research project by Lappia, De Boer & Van Rennes took place in 2006 at INHOLLAND university of professional education in the western part of The Netherlands with four pilots at School of Technology, Social Work, Education and Economics. The researchers started from the assumption that improving competence-based internships could not been based on an instrumental paradigma, because of the lack of absolute standards and the need to support deliberation among stakeholders. The Design Science Approach of Van Aken (2004) and Andriessen (2004) was been used to reveal field-tested and grounded technological rules as design specifications for improvement tools. Beside that the research project used the communicative paradigm (Visscher-Voerman & Gustafson, 2004) to reach consensus among the practitioners, who accompanion students during their internships in organisations in order to achieve a growth of competences in the choosen working field. Participants in the research project were employees of the School of Education, The School of Technology and the School of Economics, the department of Education, Quality, Research and development (OKR). Conditions for participating in the project were that the Schools recognized the problems with implementing Competence Based Internship and the School had to set the employees whe participated in the project free for half a day during the project. The Schools as stakeholders in the project were primary interested in solution of their practical problem (practical stream). The department of Education, Quality, Research and development was interested in solution of the pratical problem for dissemination reasons, but would also learn new strategies for implementation (knowledge stream). Therefore was choosen to follow the Design Science Research Approach.
DOCUMENT
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), and Stewart (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.
DOCUMENT
This paper presents the results of an exercise to assess the effects of metaphors on knowledge management. Knowledge is an abstract phenomenon with no direct referent in the real world. To think and talk about knowledge we use conceptual metaphors. The exercise shows that these metaphors greatly influence the problems we identify related to knowledge in organizations and the type of knowledge management solutions we propose. The knowledge as water metaphor used in this exercise – which reflects the dominant way of thinking in Western knowledge management literature – leads to the thingification of knowledge, resulting in a discourse about ways to formalize, manage and control knowledge. This discourse primarily serves the interests of management. In contrast, the knowledge as love metaphor used in this exercise – which reflects more an Asian way of thinking about knowledge – shifts the discourse from the topic of knowledge as a thing to the underlying preconditions for good knowledge work. These conditions include the facilitation of knowledge professionals, the quality of the relationships in the organization, and the quality of the organizational culture. This discourse is aimed at humanizing the organization instead of formalizing it and is more in the interest of employees.
DOCUMENT
