Month: November 2022

Posted on

Theoretical Framework(s) to Think About

I have chosen Organizational Knowledge Creation Theory, as developed in the mid-1990s (Nonaka & Konno, 1998). The authors describe the Japanese concept of ba, which they translate as phenomenal, shared space made up of knowledge plus information from where an organization’s knowledge creation comes. They go on to describe that if knowledge is decoupled from the shared space (virtual or otherwise), it becomes information. Information can then be codified and recorded for others’ use. The organization becomes a learning entity that is more than the sum of its members as described in Figure 1.

Figure 1 Knowledge and ba (Nonaka & Konno, 1998)

Nonaka and Konno have taken the ba concept and their definitions of tacit (experiential) and explicit (data) knowledge and used those to develop the SECI model of knowledge creation (Nonaka & Konno, 1998). SECI stands for Socialization, Externalization, Combination, and Internalization. These four concepts work in a spiral relationship where Socialization (tacit:tacit) moves through the framework into Internalization (tacit:explicit) to convert tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge in organizations. My research will investigate how semantic technologies can be used by distributed technical nuclear expert teams can use to transfer tacit knowledge to explicit knowledge as workers approach retirement.

In my initial readings, the framework makes a lot of intuitive sense, which is ironically a criticism of the model by some (Martin & Root, 2009). My concerns and questions revolve around whether it is too much associated with management for a MALAT Applied Research Project (ARP) and whether it might be too cultural, having been developed as a response to Japanese organizational needs, as well as why the model needs to start at Socialization (Kahrens & Früauff, 2018). Kahrens and Früauff also discuss how Ba can be amended in the future, taking into account new technologies. My literature review will clarify some of these issues.

References:

Kahrens, M., & Früauff, D. H. (2018). Critical evaluation of Nonaka’s SECI model. In The Palgrave Handbook of Knowledge Management (pp. 53–83). Springer.

Martin, L., & Root, D. (2009). Knowledge creation in construction: The SECI model.

Nonaka, I., & Konno, N. (1998). The concept of “Ba”: Building a foundation for knowledge creation. California Management Review, 40(3), 40–54.

Posted on

What I Want to Do Next…

This question feels like, “what do you want to be when you grow up?” I really love the thought of opportunities, but it is a question that feels overwhelming as well. There are a lot of possibilities for future dissemination and continuing research, and I would really like to explore two of them.

I have applied to participate in an International Atomic Energy (IAEA) group on the newly developed International Nuclear Management Academy (INMA) Master’s Programme in Nuclear Technology Management technical report. The INMA is a part of the IAEA that is supporting universities in developing their own master’s programmes in nuclear technology management. Here in Canada, there are very few nuclear engineering programmes and currently no nuclear technology management programmes. The IAEA community identified a gap in graduate-level nuclear management programmes. Traditional Master of Business Administration (MBA) programmes were not found to be specific enough and pure nuclear engineering programmes were seen as being too technical. I have contacts at both the Nuclear Engineering program and the Educational Informatics Lab (EILab) at the University of Ontario Institute of Technology (UOIT) and have set up meetings to discuss working with them to do research on the career development of nuclear professionals using advanced technologies and hopefully be involved somehow in the development of a nuclear technology master’s programme in Canada. This ties in my research idea about transfer of tacit knowledge from imminently retiring nuclear specialists

The second target for dissemination of my research are the global Radiation Protection (RP), Disruptive, Innovative, and Emerging Technologies (DIET) and Human Factors (HF) communities various conferences. The nuclear industry generates a vast amount of data from everything from the various aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle, management systems, nuclear power plant operation, and incidents. The RP community is often interested in using this data to improve radiation safety communication and RP methods. The HF community is often interested in using this data to reduce incidents and to enhance training programs. The DIET community is often interested in using this data to develop training using technology like Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Extended Reality (XR) technologies such as Virtual Reality (VR) and Augmented Reality (AR). My research could be disseminated as a presentation or paper at next year’s DigiDecom conference or CNS’ DIET conference. For this year’s CNS DIET conference, the requirement to present was to develop a presentation and did not require the publication of a paper. Next year’s Canadian Radiation Protection Association’s (CRPA) conference is in Halifax, Nova Scotia. I could also present a paper and/or a presentation at that conference. A short paper would be required, along with the development of a presentation. Participation in a panel discussion is another option that sometimes happens at CRPA conferences.

Both education research and conference participation are very interesting to me and would provide years’ worth of research and teaching opportunities.