Research teams as complex systems: implications for knowledge management

2012 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 118-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eleftheria Vasileiadou
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Management ◽  
Complex Systems ◽  
Research Teams

scholarly journals NURSING RESEARCH GROUPS: COMPLEX SYSTEMS FOR THE KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ítalo Rodolfo Silva ◽  
Joséte Luzia Leite ◽  
Maria Auxiliadora Trevizan ◽  
Thiago Privado da Silva ◽  
Isabel Amélia Costa Mendes
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Management ◽  
Complex Systems ◽  
Nursing Research ◽  
Research Groups

scholarly journals Cancer Informatics in 2017: A New Beginning and a Bright Future

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (01) ◽  
pp. 223-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Warner ◽  
Debra Patt ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Management ◽  
Selection Process ◽  
Research Teams ◽  
Extensive Search ◽  
New Beginning ◽  
Significant Research ◽  
Manual Review ◽  
Final Selection ◽  
Selection Of

Objective: To summarize significant research contributions on cancer informatics published in 2017. Methods: An extensive search using PubMed/Medline, Google Scholar, and manual review was conducted to identify the scientific contributions published in 2017 that address topics in cancer informatics. The selection process comprised three steps: (i) 15 candidate best papers were first selected by the two section editors, (ii) external reviewers from internationally renowned research teams reviewed each candidate best paper, and (iii) the final selection of three best papers was conducted by the editorial board of the Yearbook. Results: Results: The three selected best papers present studies addressing many facets of cancer informatics, with immediate applicability in the research and clinical domains. Conclusion: Cancer informatics is a broad and vigorous subfield of biomedical informatics. Strides in knowledge management, crowdsourcing, and visualization are especially notable in 2017.

Knowledge Cybernetics

2010 ◽  
pp. 191-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maurice I. Yolles
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Management ◽  
Complex Systems ◽  
Communicative Action ◽  
Normal Science ◽  
Useful Knowledge ◽  
Knowledge Processes ◽  
Science Approach ◽  
New Form

Knowledge cybernetics is part of complex systems, and a post-normal science approach principally concerned with the development of agents like autonomous social collectives that survive through knowledge and knowledge processes. Deriving from epistemological antecedents created by Stafford Beer and explored through notions of ontology by Eric Schwarz, a new form of knowledge management arises that is connected with the notions of Marshall and her new radical classifications for knowledge. These ideas can be closely associated with concepts of lifeworld and the ideas of communicative action by Habermas, and leads to a useful knowledge cybernetic framework. This has the capacity to relate to and develop a variety of what might be thought of as otherwise disparate theories that can ultimately be expressed in terms of knowledge.

A Complex Systems Paradox of Organizational Learning and Knowledge Management

2013 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 53-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Soheil Ghili ◽  
Serima Nazarian ◽  
Madjid Tavana ◽  
Sepehr Keyvanshokouhi ◽  
Mohammad Taghi Isaai
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Management ◽  
Organizational Learning ◽  
Complex Systems ◽  
Systems Theory ◽  
Complexity Theory ◽  
Organizational Innovation ◽  
Economic Environment ◽  
Complex Process

Many organizations are striving to survive and remain competitive in the current uncertain and rapidly changing economic environment. Businesses must innovate to face this volatility and maintain their competitiveness. Organizational learning is a complex process with many interrelated elements linking knowledge management with organizational innovation. In this paper we use several theories (i.e., organizational learning, knowledge management, organizational innovation, complexity theory, and systems theory) to discover and study the interrelationships among the organizational learning elements. The purpose of this paper is threefold: (1) We identify organizational learning as a mediating variable between knowledge management and organizational innovation; (2) We further present a paradox where decisions that are expected to improve organizational learning, surprisingly do not work; and (3) We show this paradox is not the result of overlooking organizational learning elements, but rather, caused by neglecting to consider the complex interrelationships and interdependencies among them.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document