Knowledge transfer between science and practice : The case of natural hazards and risk management in Switzerland
Type
conference paper
Date Issued
2011-04-12
Author(s)
Abstract
Organizations can be regarded as knowledge-dependent interpretation systems (Daft & Weick, 1984) in which knowledge transfer across the organization can be understood as a process of value creation (Reus, Ranft, Lamont, & Adams, 2009). While the knowledge-based view of the firm establishes knowledge as the most important strategically-relevant resource (Grant, 1996), knowledge transfer can be seen as one of the most seminal processes supporting this resource (Argote & Ingram, 2000). This argumentation is often used to support scientific research efforts as a prerequisite for operational practice. So done in natural hazards risk management, where science-based approaches and strategies to manage natural hazards (such as floods or storms) and resulting risks have been
developed within the last decade in Switzerland and other European countries to support operational practice (Bründl, Romang, Bischof, & Rheinberger, 2009). Beside science-based methods, a national strategy and a software-tool for planning and decision-making of protection measures have been
established. Previous studies revealed that these science-based methods and tools are insufficiently applied in natural hazards practice (Bischof, Romang, & Bründel, 2008). One reason for this deficit seems to be the knowledge transfer between science and practice (Rynes, Bartunek, & Daft, 2001). These circumstances gave the motivation to raise the following question: How can organizational learning and knowledge communication in an expert's network be understood and improved? Characteristics of knowledge transfer have been topic to a large body of literature (Argote & Ingram, 2000; Jacobson, Butterill, & Goering, 2005; Lervik, Fahy, & Easterby-Smith, 2010; Searle, 2008; Swan, Scarbrough, & Newell, 2010; Szulanski, 2000; Wang & Haggerty, 2009). Even though research has been focused on contexts where the effects of knowledge are definitely important, the understanding of knowledge-driven processes in expert networks has not yet been driven forward. We therefore raise the following questions: What are the crucial elements and what are the gaps andbarriers in knowledge transfer in the process of integral risk management of natural hazards? What actors, what knowledge, what decision processes are involved? Can knowledge transfer contribute to improve the knowledge flows and, hence, improve the application of research results in practice? What are appropriate means and tools?
developed within the last decade in Switzerland and other European countries to support operational practice (Bründl, Romang, Bischof, & Rheinberger, 2009). Beside science-based methods, a national strategy and a software-tool for planning and decision-making of protection measures have been
established. Previous studies revealed that these science-based methods and tools are insufficiently applied in natural hazards practice (Bischof, Romang, & Bründel, 2008). One reason for this deficit seems to be the knowledge transfer between science and practice (Rynes, Bartunek, & Daft, 2001). These circumstances gave the motivation to raise the following question: How can organizational learning and knowledge communication in an expert's network be understood and improved? Characteristics of knowledge transfer have been topic to a large body of literature (Argote & Ingram, 2000; Jacobson, Butterill, & Goering, 2005; Lervik, Fahy, & Easterby-Smith, 2010; Searle, 2008; Swan, Scarbrough, & Newell, 2010; Szulanski, 2000; Wang & Haggerty, 2009). Even though research has been focused on contexts where the effects of knowledge are definitely important, the understanding of knowledge-driven processes in expert networks has not yet been driven forward. We therefore raise the following questions: What are the crucial elements and what are the gaps andbarriers in knowledge transfer in the process of integral risk management of natural hazards? What actors, what knowledge, what decision processes are involved? Can knowledge transfer contribute to improve the knowledge flows and, hence, improve the application of research results in practice? What are appropriate means and tools?
Language
English
HSG Classification
contribution to scientific community
Refereed
Yes
Book title
OLKC 2011 Conference Proceedings: Making Waves
Publisher
University of Hull
Publisher place
Hull
Start page
14
Event Title
Conference for Organizational Learning and Knowledge Capabilities
Event Location
Hull, UK
Subject(s)
Division(s)
Eprints ID
206427