The purpose of this paper is to perform a metaphorical analysis of knowledge as energy. This paper is based on a theoretical research concerning the nature, perception, basic laws and challenges brought up by these fundamental concepts of knowledge and energy. The metaphorical analysis of knowledge and intellectual capital has been initiated by Daniel Andriessen and his findings have been presented in several seminal works (Andriessen, 2006; 2008; Andriessen and Boom, 2007). In his work, Andriessen concluded we need to find new metaphors for knowledge. In our theoretical research we shall consider the knowledge as energy metaphor, with energy as the source domain, and knowledge as the target domain, and we are interested in identifying the metaphorical semantic kernel and the limitations of this analysis. The semantic kernel contains: (1) the concept of field as a nonuniform and nonlinear distribution of knowledge; (2) dynamics of potential and kinetic forms of manifestations; (3) dynamics of work and heat, and (4) entropy and syntropy process characteristics. Limitations of this analysis come from the conservation laws of energy transformation which cannot be applied to the knowledge domain.
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
Purpose – To analyse common metaphors used in the intellectual capital (IC) and knowledge management literatures to conceptualise knowledge, in order to study the nature of the intellectual capital concept. Design/methodology/approach – A textual analysis methodology is used to analyse texts from The Knowledge-Creating Company by Nonaka and Takeuchi, Working Knowledge by Davenport and Prusak and “Brainpower” by Stewart, in order to identify underlying metaphors. Findings – Over 95 per cent of the statements about knowledge identified are based on some kind of metaphor. The two dominant metaphors that form the basis for the concept of intellectual capital are “knowledge as a resource” and “knowledge as capital”. Research limitations/implications – Metaphors highlight certain characteristics and ignore others, so the IC community should ask itself what characteristics of knowledge the “knowledge as a resource” and “knowledge as capital” metaphors ignore. Practical implications – Knowledge has no referent in the real world and requires metaphor to be defined, conceptualised, and acted upon. When using such metaphors we should become aware of their limitations as they steer us in certain directions and this may happen unconsciously. 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. Originality/value – This paper is the first to highlight that intellectual capital is a metaphor and that the metaphorical nature of the concept has far reaching consequences.
DOCUMENT
Metaphors are common phenomena intellectual capital and knowledge management theories and practice. An important question to ask is: what are the ‗best‘ metaphors we can use in our theorizing on intellectual capital and knowledge management? This paper addresses the question of the aptness of knowledge related metaphors. It concludes that the aptness of metaphorical expressions depends on three factors: the richness of the semantic field of the source domain, the validity of the mapping, and the ideological implications of the mapping. This conclusion results in a research agenda on the aptness of metaphor in knowledge management and intellectual capital theory and practice.
DOCUMENT
Knowledge management (KM) is difficult to pin down. It means different things in different organisations. The deliberate use of metaphors has been used to communicate what KM is about. This metaphorical communication can be even more enriched using visual as well as language mechanisms: ”a picture paints a thousand words” suggests we can capture more resonances of a complex subject like KM through visuals than through a description alone. In addition, visuals are perceived to transcend the limitations of language, which can be an obstacle to communication. Yet, no method currently exists that we can use to identify KM metaphors used in visuals. This paper describes our search for a method to analyse metaphors used in visuals about knowledge management. Our objective was threefold: 1) identifying new metaphors for KM in visuals that can enrich KM theorizing, 2) developing a way to identify which visuals are the most powerful in communicating KM theory, and 3) improving the use of visuals as a way of assessing students studying KM. We found that analysing metaphors used in KM visuals is possible using a method that focuses on the dominant metaphors in a visual.
DOCUMENT
In many fields within management and organizational literature there is considerable debate and controversy about key theoretical concepts and their definitions and meanings. Systematic metaphor analysis can be a useful approach to study the underlying conceptualizations that give rise to these controversies and putting them in perspective. It can help identify the different ways a theoretical concept is structured and given meaning, provide insight into the way these different conceptualizations relate to each other, and show how these conceptualizations impact further theorization about the concept. This article describes the procedure for a systematic analysis of the metaphors used to conceptualize key theoretical concepts. To examine its usefulness, the authors apply the approach to the field of social capital, and in particular to the concept of ‘relationships’ in organizations. In the metaphor analysis of three seminal articles on social capital, the authors identify seven metaphoric concepts for relationships. The metaphors are illuminated as important for providing imagery that adds specific meaning in the process of authors theorizing about social capital like ‘tie’, ‘path’ and ‘bridge’. They add dynamics and controllability to the concepts by attributing an array of verbs like ‘to move between’ or ‘to use’ relationships. In addition, the metaphors allow for the attribution of specific characteristics to the concept of relationships that can be used as variables in theory construction, such as the strength of a relationship or the ‘distance’ between people. These insights are useful in exploring and reconciling differences in social capital definitions.
DOCUMENT
In May 2007, our Centre for Research in Intellectual Capital hosted the International Congress on Intellectual Capital: The future of business navigation. The Congress – which took place in Haarlem, The Netherlands – was attended by more than 140 participants from 23 countries. Based on almost 70 papers, we designed a conference program that consisted of more than 90 sessions. This special issue is based on a selection of the best papers of our conference.
DOCUMENT
Regenerative forms of higher education are emerging, and required, to connect with some of the grand transition challenges of our times. This paper explores the lived experience of 21 students learning to navigate a regenerative form of higher education in the Mission Impact course at The Hague University of Applied Sciences. This semester-length course ran for two iterations with the intention of connecting the students with local transitions towards a more circular society, one where products are lasting and have multiple lives when they are shared, refurbished, or become a source for a new product. At the end of each iteration, the students reflected on their experience using the Living Spiral Framework, which served as basis for an interpretative phenomenological analysis of their journey navigating this transformative course. The results of this study include four themes; (1) Opting in—Choosing RHE, (2) Learning in Regenerative Ways, (3) Navigating Resistance(s), and (4) Transformative Impacts of RHE. These themes can be used by practitioners to design and engage with regenerative forms of higher education, and by scholars to guide further inquiry. van den Berg B, Poldner KA, Sjoer E, Wals AEJ. ‘Sweet Acid’ An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis of Students’ Navigating Regenerative Higher Education. Education Sciences. 2022; 12(8):533. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12080533
DOCUMENT
Metaphor is one of the important discursive themes in organizational literature (Grant et al.,2001). Metaphors play an important role in the discourse within organizations as well as in theorizing about organizations. This empirical paper focuses on the latter by analysing the role of metaphor in the development of theoretical concepts – in particular the concept of social capital – through the means of quantitative content analysis. Some authors argue that metaphors should be avoided in organizational theory (Bourgeois and Pinder, 1983; Tinker, 1986). Others see metaphors as valuable creative tools for developing new theories and insights (Weick, 1989). Morgan (1997) has shown that many theories about organizations can be ‘reordered’ (Keenoy et al., 2003) into a particular metaphorical view of organizations, showing the metaphorical bases of organizational theorizing. Lakoff and Johnson (1980, 1999) go even further, presenting compelling evidence from cognitive science indicating that metaphors are inescapable because they are the basis for our abstract reasoning. There is a debate about the way metaphor works (Black, 1993; Cornelissen, 2005; Heracleous, 2003; Keenoy et al., 2003; Lakoff and Johnson, 1999; Marshak, 2003; Oswick et al. 2002, 2003; Tsoukas, 1991;) especially about whether metaphor is simply a matter of comparison highlighting the analogies in the source and target domain, or whether a metaphor does more then that. In the paper we take the latter position and adopt Lakoff and Johnson’s (1999) model of cross-domain mapping. This model states that not only similarities and features are transferred from the source to the target domain but that the target domain often gets its structure from the source domain. The metaphorical mapping from the source to the target domain can be rich and complex because metaphors have many ‘entailments’. Entailments are the connotations of the metaphor that transport meaning from the source to the target domain. Furthermore, the application of conceptual metaphor often happens out-of-awareness (Lakoff and Johnson, 1999; Marshak, 2003). It is part of the unconscious mental operations concerned with conceptual systems, meaning, inference, and language. We can recognize the unconscious use of metaphor in organizational theorizing by looking at the literal meaning of organizational concepts and statements (Andriessen, 2006).
DOCUMENT
This article explores the perceptions of development through metaphor use by students of International Business Management Studies at The Hague University. Students’ reflections upon the concepts of nature and development before and after educational intervention are examined through discourse analysis and narrative analysis. Results show that initially students reflect the dominant development paradigm which tends to conflate ‘nature’ with ‘natural resources’. This study suggests that the critical course has the potential to shift the student focus from the unquestioning acceptance of economic development and instrumental view of nature to recognition of more ecologically benign and culturally variable paths to sustainability. In terms of pedagogy, the ‘trans-human’ Gestalt, or mindset conducive to planetary consciousness, may require a distinct type of didactic strategy, discussed in this article. It is concluded that while transformative social learning towards sustainability requires the integrative switching back and forth between the various mindsets, effective, ecologically engaged and critical learning may require a more fixed, committed and above all affirmative action approach. https://doi.org/10.1177/0973408214529989 https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
MULTIFILE
